Archive for Monday, September 29, 2008

House defeats bailout plan; Dow closes down more than 700

Dow drops largest single-day point total in history

Lawrence residents respond to today's failure of the bank bailout bill in the House.

September 29, 2008, 1:28 p.m. Updated September 29, 2008, 5:07 p.m.

Advertisement

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd, D-Conn., left, and Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., right, hold a news conference on the failed vote in the House of Representatives on the financial bailout package on Capitol Hill in Washington on Monday.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd, D-Conn., left, and Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., right, hold a news conference on the failed vote in the House of Representatives on the financial bailout package on Capitol Hill in Washington on Monday.

How Kansas House members voted

Reader poll
Do you support the U.S. House's vote Monday to reject the $700 billion bailout bill?

or See the results without voting

-->
-->

— In a vote that shook the government, Wall Street and markets around the world, the House on Monday defeated a $700 billion emergency rescue for the nation's financial system, leaving both parties' lawmakers and the Bush administration scrambling to pick up the pieces. Dismayed investors sent the Dow Jones industrials plunging 777 points, the most ever for a single day.

"We need to put something back together that works," a grim-faced Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said after he and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke joined in an emergency strategy session at the White House. On Capitol Hill, Democratic leaders said the House would reconvene Thursday, leaving open the possibility that it could salvage a reworked version.

Senate leaders showed no inclination to try to bring the measure to a vote before they could determine its fate in the House. President Bush, meanwhile, was scheduled to make a statement on the rescue plan this morning, the White House said.

All sides agreed the effort to bolster beleaguered financial markets, potentially the biggest government intervention since the Great Depression, could not be abandoned.

But in a remarkable display on Monday, a majority of House members slapped aside the best version their leaders and the administration had been able to come up with, bucking presidential speeches, pleading visits from Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and urgent warnings that the economy could nosedive without the legislation.

In the face of thousands of phone calls and e-mails fiercely opposing the measure, many lawmakers were not willing to take the political risk of voting for it just five weeks before the elections.

The bill went down, 228-205.

The House Web site was overwhelmed as millions of people sought information about the measure through the day.

The legislation the administration promoted would have allowed the government to buy bad mortgages and other sour assets held by troubled banks and other financial institutions. Getting those debts off their books should bolster those companies' balance sheets, making them more inclined to lend and ease one of the biggest choke points in a national credit crisis. If the plan worked, the thinking went, it would help lift a major weight off the national economy, which is already sputtering.

Hoping to pick up enough GOP votes for the next try, Republicans floated several ideas. One would double the $100,000 ceiling on federal deposit insurance. Another would end rules that require companies to devalue assets on their books to reflect the price they could get in the market.

In the meantime, Paulson said he would work with other regulators "to use all the tools available to protect our financial system and our economy."

"Our tool kit is substantial but insufficient," he said, indicating the government intended to continue piecemeal fixes while pressing Congress for broader action.

Stocks started plummeting on Wall Street even before Monday's vote was over, as traders watched the rescue measure going down on television. Meanwhile, lawmakers were watching them back.

As a digital screen in the House chamber recorded a cascade of "no" votes against the bailout, Democratic Rep. Joe Crowley of New York shouted news of the falling Dow Jones industrials. "Six hundred points!" he yelled, jabbing his thumb downward.

The final stock carnage far surpassed the 684-point drop on the first trading day after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

In the House, "no" votes came from both the Democratic and Republican sides of the aisle. More than two-thirds of Republicans and 40 percent of Democrats opposed the bill. Several Democrats in close election fights waited until the last moment, then went against the bill as it became clear the vast majority of Republicans were opposing it.

Thirteen of the 19 most vulnerable Republicans and Democrats in an Associated Press analysis voted against the bill despite the pleas from Bush and their party leaders to pass it.

In all, 65 Republicans joined 140 Democrats in voting "yes," while 133 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted "no."

The overriding question was what to do next.

"The legislation may have failed; the crisis is still with us," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., in a news conference after the defeat. "What happened today cannot stand."

Republican leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, the minority leader, said he and other Republicans were pained to back the measure, but in light of the potential consequences for the economy and all Americans, "We need to renew our efforts to find a solution that Congress can support."

Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said there was scant time to reopen legislation that was the product of hard-fought bipartisan negotiations.

"What happened today was not a failure of a bill, it was a failure of will," said Dodd, the Banking Committee chairman. "Our hope is that cooler heads will prevail, people will think about what they did today and recognize that this is not just scare tactics - it's reality."

A brutal round of partisan finger-pointing followed the vote.

Republicans blamed Pelosi's scathing speech near the close of the debate - which assailed Bush's economic policies and a "right-wing ideology of anything goes, no supervision, no discipline, no regulation" of financial markets - for the defeat. It was not much different from her usual tough words against the president and his party.

"We could have gotten there today had it not been for the partisan speech that the speaker gave on the floor of the House," Boehner said.

Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., the whip, estimated that Pelosi's speech changed the minds of a dozen Republicans who might otherwise have supported the plan.

That amounted to an appalling accusation by Republicans against Republicans, said Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the Financial Services Committee: "Because somebody hurt their feelings, they decide to punish the country."

More than a repudiation of Democrats, Frank said, Republicans' refusal to vote for the bailout was a rejection of their own president.

Indeed, many GOP lawmakers spurned Bush's urgent calls for action. "We have a gun to our head," said Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, R-Fla., who opposed the bill. "This isn't legislation - it's extortion."

The two men campaigning to replace Bush watched the situation closely - from afar - and demanded action.

Lawmakers were under extraordinary pressure from powerful outside groups, which gave notice they considered the legislation a "key vote" - one they would consider when rating members of Congress.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said opponents of the bailout would pay for their stance.

"Make no mistake: When the aftermath of congressional inaction becomes clear, Americans will not tolerate those who stood by and let the calamity happen," said R. Bruce Josten, the Chamber's top lobbyist, in a letter to members.

The conservative Club for Growth made a similar threat to supporters of the bailout.

"We're all worried about losing our jobs," Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., declared in an impassioned speech in support of the bill before the vote. "Most of us say, 'I want this thing to pass, but I want you to vote for it - not me."'

"We're in this moment, and if we fail to do the right thing, Heaven help us," he said.

If Congress doesn't come around on a bailout, more pressure would fall on the Federal Reserve.

The Fed, which has been providing billions in short-term loans to squeezed banks to help them overcome credit stresses, could keep expanding those loans to encourage lending. And, it could keep working with other central banks to inject billions into financial markets overseas.

It also has the power to expand emergency lending to other types of companies and even to individuals if they are unable to secure adequate credit.

Comments

KS 6 years, 9 months ago

Okay folks, get out your checkbooks. There are going to be a lot of bargains out there in the stock market to buy within the next few days. Get ready. Don't be asleep at the switch. What goes down has no place to go but up! It always does. Do some dollar cost averaging.

kusp8 6 years, 9 months ago

..........If only Chuck Norris were around, he'd fix everything.

notajayhawk 6 years, 9 months ago

Sigmund (Anonymous) says: "An exercise for the reader: Each time the bailout plan looked like it would pass oil went up. Each time it failed oil dropped. Why? How are oil and bad Fannies related. Hint: Oil going down hurts Russia, UAE, Venezuela, etc."Oil went down when the bailout failed because economists and large investors fully expect a major financial collapse, leading to businesses closing and people being out of work, in turn leading to a major drop in demand. Rejoice in the lower oil prices - there won't be much to celebrate when nobody can buy it.***Why should we have paid for the bailout? Number one, because it affects us, not rich Wall Street fat cats. Half the population of the country is invested in Wall Street directly or indirectly. Your 401K's, your retirement funds - how do you think they make the money you're counting on collecting? (I realize for the school children in the audience this is an alien concept.)Second, because it's not the Republicans' fault or the Democrats' fault. It's not the president's fault or the Congress's fault. It's not Wall Street's fault. It's our fault. Blame it on the politicians? We sent them there, and we didn't pay attention to what they were doing. Blame Wall Street? Whose money were they playing with? Ours., that's whose.Did I ever check to see if my retirement funds were invested in the derivative market? Nope. Did any of you? I doubt it. It was our money they were playing with, and it was our responsibility to see that they were investing it wisely. But nobody cared as long as they kept getting their dividends and annual reports that said everything was fine. We not only let this happen, we made it happen. And the failure of the bailout is going to bite us* on the butt, not just the rich investors. All you Obama supporters - well, do the math. How much does a nearly 800 point drop in the DOW translate into in lost capital gains tax revenue? How much does it affect the income of that 1% Obama was going to tax to pay for these sweeping changes he proposed?I hope you can all remember how much you celebrated the failed bailout when your small business can't get a loan, you can't get a mortgage, you can't get a car loan, you can't get [gasp!] a student loan, and all those credit card offers stop coming in the mail.

Unix_Admin 6 years, 9 months ago

I'm so glad this failed. It's about time they did something right on the hill! Let the market work itself out.

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

The very important issue, and the reason this bill was rightfully canned, was the attempt by the Democrats, led by Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi, plus Paulson, Goldman Sachs, Warren Buffett and powerful hedge fund managers, to take control of the US financial system by financial coup.The poison pills in this bill were something that could not easily be undone.Granting the Treasury the mission to be responsible for the welfare of the economy? Give me a break.Millions of dollars, without any oversight, to a criminal left wing outfit like ACORN? Not on your life.

Sigmund 6 years, 9 months ago

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says: "Oil went down when the bailout failed because economists and large investors fully expect a major financial collapse, leading to businesses closing and people being out of work, in turn leading to a major drop in demand. Rejoice in the lower oil prices - there won't be much to celebrate when nobody can buy it."Close but (if I might be so bold) no cigar. Oil went down both because world wide demand is likely to fall AND the US government doesn't get to print $700 BILLION new greenbacks. Fewer dollars ($700 billion to be exact) chasing the same amount of production (oil, stocks, everything else) puts downward pressure on all prices, stocks, cigars, and even oil.Further, putting both monetary and fiscal policy in the hands of single unelected political appointee is a horrible idea. Power corrupts and absolute power (and this came real, real close) corrupts absolutely. I would rather be poorer today than be obligated to pay off the countries bad debts decades into the future. Especially when part of the price is to centralize the whole economy into Paulsen's or any other single persons hands. Recessions come and go, the business cycle. Bureaucrats are forever!Thank you Democrat's for finally standing up to BushCo when it really counted. Boyda, if she can hang tough, will have my support and gratitude for years and years to come. Jim Ryan does not have the intelligence nor the balls to go against the President.

Tony Kisner 6 years, 9 months ago

Hey J-chisox, here is an investment tip. Take the Twins to win tomorrow.

Sigmund 6 years, 9 months ago

Newell_Post (Anonymous) says: "A Democratic congress is not going to approve a Bush bailout plan a month before the presidential election."Have you been living under a rock for the last couple of weeks? Democratic leadership Pelosi, Reid, Frank, and Obama are all pushing for the BushCo plan! When will the democratic leadership and the majority of the democratic house finally stand up to BushCo? (Nancy Boyda exclude, thanks Nancy!)

Byrne 6 years, 9 months ago

So, everyone celebrating about how this failed ... if National City fails, like it looks it is going to, and that sets off a wave of regional bank failures ...What is going to happen to medium and small businesses' lines of credit? How are a lot of those businesses going to go about their daily business pay salaries?

ASBESTOS 6 years, 9 months ago

"Never trust a rightwinger. They simply lie and lie with a smile."I think the vote was 134 Republicans not trusting the Bush lie and 94 Democrats not trusting the Bush lie.That would be Pelosi and 204 other cpngressmen that believed the lie.It makes me wonder about thse Democrats, that piss and moan over "Bush Lied People Died" for the Iraq war.... Would believe him on this bill! However fot this bill "Bush lied, and Acorn and La Raza get $50 billion dollars", which supports these left winger groups, and Obama.These politicians have comitted treason, and so did the President.I am a GOP member and I am all for Impeachment of Pelosi, Reic, and Bush.Peas in a pod.

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

A gain on paper is no gain until it is sold and exchanged for Federal Reserve notes. Same goes for a loss on paper. If you do not sell, you have lost nothing.

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

If you do not have debt, you are smart.

true_patriot 6 years, 9 months ago

Politics makes for some strange bedfellows but look for a short honeymoon if the GOP can't unfetter itself from its myopia and look at how the long-term financial survival of our nation is hanging in the balance because of their insistence on a myth-based economic frame aided by Democrats so nervous about being tagged as the party of big spending (ridiculous in the light of the GOP/Bush spending since 2001) that they'll make any sort of compromise or worry about trying to balance the budget just to try to earn brownie points for fiscal responsibility.I have not seen anything approaching real fiscal responsibility in many years now, but after the fiasco of letting Republicans run things and set historic lows in fiscal responsibility, it's time to let Democrats have a swipe at trying to cause less damage than their predecessors, since I sincerely doubt they'll actually do anything constructive.If you Google for it, you might be able to find a suggestion by renowned economist James Galbraith made sometime over the weekend, where he suggests a more targeted approach than the current Bush bail out plan. In short, it lets hedge funds fail completely, removes the $100K cap on FDIC insurance, puts a few hundred billion into FDIC and a little into the FBI. This is to at once make a show of putting money into FDIC to restore confidence in loan books for major banks while using most of the money to hire real analysts to get a handle of how much bad debt there actually is and where it resides so we know what we're dealing with and then if criminal wrongdoing is discovered along the way it can be investigated and prosecuted to send a signal to the world we are now serious about not letting our financial sector fail and pull down the world with it. It puts another $300 billion in reserve for a real emergency once the first part of the plan has had a chance to work. It calls for doing this targeted approach initially, then meeting again in 20 or 30 or 40 days to review and move forward. It ultimately calls for stimulating the economy at the "main street" level by initiating energy infrastructure development and some other longer term ideas, but I really like the directness and simplicity of the short term plan compared to just letting the corporate predators raid our tax coffers yet again with no real oversight attached.

americandreamrealty 6 years, 9 months ago

from the Simpsons:Kent Brockman(consulting an expert): "Professor, without knowing precisely what the danger is, would you say it's time for our viewers to crack each other's heads open and feast on the goo inside?"Expert: "Yes. Yes I would, Kent."

PosseComitatus 6 years, 9 months ago

Liberty prevailed today. Now if we can go back to the gold standard we may be able to fix this.

chocolateplease 6 years, 9 months ago

logrithmic, asbestos,etc :Both parties (and the greedy wrongdoers on Wall Street) are to blame for this, not just one. During Clinton years, they pushed Greenspan to keep lowering interest rates while pushing Freddie and Fannie to keep pumping out loans to those least qualified to take them. The housing market was on fire.... you could speculate on a bunch of houses, take an ARM, then sell for a giant profit just when the ARM took a jump in the rate. So much for that theory. Then you have the diehard Phil Graham (McCain's former econ advisor who called americans a bunch of whiners) style de-regulators and typical Bush admin incompetence, combined with ideologues who think "free-market" is something etched in the bible. What a disaster.I

BrianR 6 years, 9 months ago

The Asian markets are tightening up as well; Nikkei closed at -483.75 . Credit is getting difficult to get in China and some of the factories that manufactured goods for American markets are laying people off. Perhaps by the end of the week, some Chinese worker will be on CNN complaining that his job was outsourced to Iowa. Has the margin call from China arrived yet?I love the smell of Laissez Faire in the morning.

Scott Drummond 6 years, 9 months ago

And tonight, to the growing list of personal shortcomings of the good Senator McCain, we can now add counting chickens before they hatch. McCain hack on MTP:""What Senator McCain was able to do was to help bring all of the parties to the table, including the House Republicans, whose votes were needed to pass this"[in my very best Don Adams voice: "Missed it by that much....."]

greywolf85203 6 years, 9 months ago

History is repeating its self. I'm sure the people that are glad it failed are the ones that have closed their accounts and are dealing in cash. Wake up folks. This is a bad time. This is how the great depression started. What does the congress have to worry I am sure they have money stashed in foreign banks. So what if its close to election. I would want someone that is willing to do what it takes to fix our economy than worry about mud on his/her face. If our financial system goes down say buhbye to your paychecks think about that one!

Shardwurm 6 years, 9 months ago

Rich and greedy? You think those are the only ones at risk here?What about your 401k that is invested with these financial firms? How about losing everything you've saved for the last 20 years?Haven't saved anything? You're a welfare case.It's more than just the rich and greedy you idiots.

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

larry_the_moocher wrote: "Homeowners have a floating line of credit called a heloc. They too, use this for emergencies or opportunities."That is the flawed reasoning that got us into this situation.Then Larry wrote:"With the passage of the bill, your 401K's will be safe if invested in insurance companies, as well as your other investments if covered by the FDIC."That is patently false. I will give Larry the benefit of the doubt and consider him ignorant beyond belief; otherwise I would have to label his statement a malicious lie that was made with the intent to mislead and misdirect others into potentially unsafe investments.

gogoplata 6 years, 9 months ago

U.S. Reps. Nancy Boyda, D-Topeka, Jerry Moran, R-Hays, and Todd Tiahrt, R-Goddard voted against the financial markets bill.Bravo!!!! Kansas Democrats and Republicans getting it right. How about that. Represenatives actually representing the voice of the people.

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

When we wake up tomorrow, the bed you sleep in, the coffee pot, the coffee, the water, the toilet, your closet full of clothes, your TV, your phone, your car in the garage, the trees, the sunrise, the birds in the sky - they will all still be there.What will be missing is some nebulous notion of the value of a piece of paper you might or might not hold in the care of some stock broker. So you paid money for the piece of paper. At some point in time, the value of the paper may have doubled or tripled since you bought it. Rather than selling the paper in exchange for dollars, you held on to the paper, and now it is worth about what you paid for it, maybe less. That is your problem, not mine.Maybe your home is worth less than you paid for it. So what? As long as you pay your mortgage, you still have rights to the property and will enjoy the benefits of living in a home you call your own. One day, those rights will be worth a lot (as long as the Socialists do not nationalize all property).It is not the vagaries of the free market that threaten you. Nationaliation of businesses and property represents the greatest potential to destroy your lifestyle and steal your freedom.

compmd 6 years, 9 months ago

BrianR said:"Possibly more bank failures. Recession. More overseas banks failing."You raise an excellent point that isn't being covered much in American media. European banks are starting to face the same problems. Just recently, one British bank was nationalized, another bought out, and another European bank was effectively nationalized by a multinational bailout program.

PosseComitatus 6 years, 9 months ago

"To preserve the faith of the nation by an exact discharge of its debts and contracts, expend the public money with the same care and economy we would practice with our own, and impose on our citizens no unnecessary burden... are the landmarks by which we are to guide ourselves in all our proceedings." --Thomas Jefferson

james bush 6 years, 9 months ago

It must be evident to the dems that Pelosi is a lousy leader or is it that she is just another gawddamned politician.McCain ain't much as an accomplished speaker but at his worst he isn't out to take our money to distribute to his party...........and that's his strong point!Obama, Reid, Pelosi....now that is a terrible prospect ............worse than BUSH!

Sigmund 6 years, 9 months ago

Having not yet been sold into slavery for the price of $700 billion I remain a free man. I am poorer, yes, but I am still free!Today is a GOOD day!

PosseComitatus 6 years, 9 months ago

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." -- Thomas Jefferson

jhawkchisox 6 years, 9 months ago

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Who says? I know of 300 different economics professors that are begging for this bill not to go through.There probably aren't 50 economics professors in the state of Kansas, but who am I to challenge who you know.This problem is too big for the capital markets to handle. The government buying the bad assets (at market value, remember the companies will still have huge net losses) will hold them for the short term. It will likely make the taxpayers money when the assets go up in value. If they would of called it an Economic Stabilization Plan instead of a Bailout it would of already passed. No bailout will lead to more companies going under, which leads to lower valuation of assets (companies hold each others' debt and when they default both companies lose). Unemployment goes up, which means more people won't be able to pay their mortgage. This will fuel the housing depression which will cause even lower CMBS and MBS valuations. The AIG buyout was a perfect example of the government doing it right. What people hear is $80B, not that AIG has to pay back the 80B at 12% interest AND taxpayers get 80% of AIG. It's a FANTASTIC deal for taxpayers. This "bailout" is absolutely necessary to keep a deep deep recession/depression from becoming reality and may even return taxpayers a PROFIT.I like having a job, and all of our chances for unemployment were greatly enhanced today.

staff04 6 years, 9 months ago

Boehner's Republicans decided to screw the country because Nancy Pelosi hurt their feelings. Eric Cantor promised half of the Republican caucus would support the bill. That's going to play well in November when the Dow is down around 5K...

MeAndFannieLou 6 years, 9 months ago

Have you hear Amy Winehouse's new song?They tried to make me bail out Wall Street, I said "No, no, no"....~ Sick and tired of being sick and tired.

chocolateplease 6 years, 9 months ago

The Washington Post reports that of those members who voted in favor of the bailout, only 2 are in highly contested re-election races, while those who voted against it are almost entirely up for re-election in competitive situations. That pretty much tells you why people voted against the measure: they want to be re-elected. The people who voted against the bailout are scared for their jobs.So, whatever happened to doing the right thing for the country regardless of what your constituents want you to do? I suppose that sounds strange, but truly, don't we want our leaders to sometimes "lead" us rather than follow us? Sometimes the majority is wrong, and we need actual leaders to do something to get us where we need to go. What if the predictions are correct, and people start losing their jobs, houses, retirements, and so on? Will we be happy to watch this disaster unfold then?

ASBESTOS 6 years, 9 months ago

"There probably aren't 50 economics professors in the state of Kansas, but who am I to challenge who you know."That is rich. Like Kansas is the center of the financial universe and there are "economic wizards" around every tree in Kansas, and you can only come up with "about 50"? The World is not Kansas with a fence around it. Is Kansas your frame of reference on this National and Global issue? LOFAO!!!!You have got to be kidding with that post. I am not going to call it what it is, but there is a lot of "it"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""No bailout will lead to more companies going under, which leads to lower valuation of assets (companies hold each others' debt and when they default both companies lose). Unemployment goes up, which means more people won't be able to pay their mortgage. This will fuel the housing depression which will cause even lower CMBS and MBS valuations."Again, "SEZ WHO"? Solid Mortgages are not in question.It is the decoupling of housing prices from the CPI. Until 1999 Housing hade been even with CPI, but from 1999 on it is decoupled and growing faster than CPI. That means the price was increasing geometrically. That is impossible, as the CPI is grounded in petty things like "real asset value" like hard currency and prodcutivity.You just are parroting the "Doom and gloom cloud" with no backup. The solution is to have Phblic Hearings" and get the best and brightest on the case. For 8 years you Democrats have been complaining about Bush and his croonies and how they lie and how they are stupid... well I agree. We need smarter people than the current admin. to fix this problem, but part of the probelm is inflated housing prices.They still have to go down and stabilize, they are not real asset value.

Tony Kisner 6 years, 9 months ago

The super rich will not need tax cuts for years to come. They will have loss carryforwards for time everlasting. No income = no taxes.

jonas_opines 6 years, 9 months ago

Bwahaha. Thanks Godot, that was pretty classic.

Sigmund 6 years, 9 months ago

Byrne (Anonymous) says: "So, everyone celebrating about how this failed : if National City fails, like it looks it is going to, and that sets off a wave of regional bank failures :"Only if they have bad Fannie and Freddie paper. The good banks are buying the bad banks. Bye bye Wachovia you POS!Byrne (Anonymous) says:"What is going to happen to medium and small businesses' lines of credit?"They will be tight and more expensive. Good companies with good histories will be charged less, more risky more costly.Byrne (Anonymous) says: "How are a lot of those businesses going to go about their daily business pay salaries?"If you borrow to make payroll, please stop. Go 90 days on invoices or longer with suppliers and use that time to reduce expense and cushion your cash balances and finance your payroll out of income. Suppliers, who need customers as much as you need them, may need to start offering their own lines of credit to their best customers, use that instead of a banks line of credit. Even use a credit card (at higher rates) as a last resort to meet payroll but get out of debt and dependence on credit. Offer discounts to customers who pay in cash within a week of invoice, do anything to get cash flow meeting payroll, taxes, and expenses.Funny on how tax the "rich" employers has turned into concern over how "rich" employers can borrow to meet their payroll.....

geekin_topekan 6 years, 9 months ago

Is this our October Surprise?Suspend the elections indefinately during our "national crisis"?

eel 6 years, 9 months ago

Well the DOW just closed down 777points (only 7%) Look for more %points going twards the downward trend tomorrrow. Burn that blank check!

true_patriot 6 years, 9 months ago

Have to agree with Sigmund. What saved things today from the latest attempt at predation on the American taxpayer was a combination of Republicans and Democrats working against the measure.The only problem is that putting together something that WILL work is going to be difficult because the dissenters in both parties are in it for very different goals, at least in part. The morning I heard some of the Republican leadership calling for capital gains tax cuts for the ultra-rich i knew i'd seen everything. Not only is that kind of fundamentalist always-play-to-win-the-immediate-battle ideology what got us into this mess in the first place, financial institutions by definition don't even have capital gains to be taxed.

jhawkchisox 6 years, 9 months ago

Of course such an idea will never fly. Instead - cash for trash is what the rightwing has proposed.It's not cash for trash. The government is buying bad assets, true. Most of these assets don't even mature anytime soon, and they will return close to par when the economy improves. For example: Company A buys 100M bond. Bond is now worth $70M. It's worth $70 but there is no buyer given no one has liquidity. The government pays $70 to Company ACompany A reconizes $30M Loss.Companies now have their bad assets off the books as one time losses, trust each other, begin lending. Credit spreads come down, liquidity returns to market.The best part is the $70 the government bought will improve to $85 when it matures, which means it's a $15 gain returned to taxpayers (in theory).

Trobs 6 years, 9 months ago

Yes!Finally, they stop sending my money away to save those that greedily lost their own.

geekin_topekan 6 years, 9 months ago

"..Does my memory fail me or did not a thin tall man with a beard wrapped in white from toes to top of head named Osama state he would destroy our economy within our borders? Where have our billions gone the past eight years? To fight Osama in two countries--to build facilities here at home that snoop and spy even on us?"_from an anonymous poster journalstar.com+++Yikes.Very familiar now that he mentions it.

Fred Whitehead Jr. 6 years, 9 months ago

The problem is very simple. Credit markets have frozen. Business and individuals will have difficulty in getting credit if at all. Is there ANYONE who cannot see this problemCredit card offers by the dozen daily in our mailboxes. People borrowing money they CANNOT pay back. Buying the big camper to go to the races with a $17,000.00 a year income. 7 credit cards maxed out. Is there ANYONE who cannot see the problem????

BrianR 6 years, 9 months ago

fleeba (Anonymous) says:"wow.. wonder where it goes from here:"Possibly more bank failures. Recession. More overseas banks failing.

acg 6 years, 9 months ago

Wow, I did not expect this at all. It kind of blows my mind. I've gotten so used to congress being sheep that I didn't think they'd have the cajones to stop this "bailout". I'm happy, but kind of scared. What does this mean for our economy now?

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

Staff04 goes partisan to defend the most poisonously partisan crook in the House. Way to go.

jhawkchisox 6 years, 9 months ago

In no way did I insinuate that Kansas is the center of the financial universe, I just laugh at the notion that you know 300 economics professors. I actually have a degree in Finance from KU and work in Finance in Chicago. I have a little background to understand what I'm talking about.You make absolutely no point and make no counter argument. Houses were growing at rates higher than inflation, correct. It's called a housing bubble, and it's bursting because over the long term housing can't grow faster than income. The difference between this bubble and the tech bubble is that the entire Financial Market that has been one of the largest strengths of this country is crumbling before our eyes because mortgages are a large part of their assets. It's a contributing factor, but not the only factor.Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Wachovia, Washington Mutual, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac all gone, Merrill selling itself. The government steps in with no more short selling of hundreds of financials, not enough. This issue is too big for the Fed not to step in, does Citigroup, JP Morgan, or Bank of America need to fail before you think the Fed should do something.Fun Fact: The FDIC only has about 50B in assets. There's 7 Trillion deposits in the US. Not saying it will happen but if a "too big to fail" bank goes, so does the FDIC isn't big enough to cover them. How bad does it need to get before you'd like the Fed to do something. Don't respond "market's should correct themselves" because this one is too big to fix. NO ONE is lending money, what is supposed to fix that, more bankruptices?"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""There probably aren't 50 economics professors in the state of Kansas, but who am I to challenge who you know."That is rich. Like Kansas is the center of the financial universe and there are "economic wizards" around every tree in Kansas, and you can only come up with "about 50"? The World is not Kansas with a fence around it. Is Kansas your frame of reference on this National and Global issue? LOFAO!!!!You have got to be kidding with that post. I am not going to call it what it is, but there is a lot of "it"

tollef 6 years, 9 months ago

700 Billion is cheap compared to the money liquidity lost in today's market decline. Lets see we lost 1.2 Trillion dollars today alone (in market value) because of political infighting.What is better a bailout or lack of confidence in the markets? I am all for personal responsibility when it comes to handling finances. However, when banks go belly up and the FDIC is forced to cover deposits. (Think of that cost) or when their is no more money for banks to loan to a small business, or money for your childs education.A collapse of the system will affect all of us greatly. Jobs will dissappear, national debt will increase greatly with reduced tax revenue, therefore requiring a substantial tax increase.On the positive side, it is a great wake up call to everyone. There needs to be some negative adjustment to the market for it to work.Not a sermon, just a thought.

ASBESTOS 6 years, 9 months ago

BTW a Democratically elected majority voted this thing down. That would represent the "will of the people". That would mean Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and George Bush are on the wrong side of American Citizens.Pres. Bush can have an executive order to end the inflationary assessment on capital gains and can end "mark to market" valuation where these banks can then carry these Mortgage Backed Securities on their balance sheets.Simple and the rest can be in Savings Bonds like vehicle with a nice 8% return.The point is there wer no **public Hearings* on the matter.

chocolateplease 6 years, 9 months ago

Logrithmic,I think you are right about the bundled securities being impossible to value. But then, isn't how it plays out possibly like this?:the market hates uncertaintythe market, if it can't value a security, doesn't want itso, value approaches zero when nobody will buy itthen, govt. pays something for it (if bailout occurs - not 70% of loan value!)and, some of the loans are actually good ones and, some get renegotiated, or default ensues and govt agency gets the property and sells it on market** hence, something is gained for govt/taxpayer coffers. How much is the 700B question.

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

logrithmic conveniently overlooked adding Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Emanuel Cleaver, Maxine Waters, and several other democrats to his list of crooks that should be included in grand jury investigation into the causes and culprits in this mess.The last thing we need is a central bank funded by $700 Billion taxpayer dollars under the control of congress. In fact, disbanding the Federal Reserve is in order.

Rationalanimal 6 years, 9 months ago

This bailout and defeat is a microcosm of everything wrong with Congress. Here again is an example of big brother Congress forcing lending policies onto the housing market and in turn providing cover for executives who plunder the corporate coffers. There are at least a half dozen Congressional members who if the same standards applied in Enron were applied in this debacle should be impeached or go to jail, for starters, Chris Dodd, Charles Schumer, Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. If they had any shame, they would at least resign instead of demanding the American taxpayer write $700 billion dollar check to "bailout" people who never deserved the loans they got in the first place. It is a simple axiom of business, if you are stupid, you should go out of business. That is what needs to happen rather than fire up the printing press further devaluing the American dollar, increasing inflation, increasing energy prices and ultimately shelving the current problem for a later date when the current batch of idiots are long gone or their memories are shot.

Danielle Brunin 6 years, 9 months ago

Let it crash! Those rich ba%$#rds have a lot more to lose than us ordinary people. I'm used to being poor.

ASBESTOS 6 years, 9 months ago

"The best part is the $70 the government bought will improve to $85 when it matures, which means it's a $15 gain returned to taxpayers (in theory).""in theroy" is the reason why the American Public should have been educated in this process and it not rushed through. In theory is simply not good enough with $700 Billion dollars."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""6) Bailed out the automakers with loans of $25 billion while not requiring any pay cuts from executives."Careful genjius, that was added by the democratic leadership. They control the additions to the bill."3) Illegal invasions and wars in two countries to the tune of $3 billion a week - none of it paid for."Untrue, the congress voted for it, just like this bailout, the dems could not fall over fast enough to "vote for this bill" because they loaded up the Irqaq was billw up with christmas ornaments and earmarks. Remember "Bush Lied" issue? Why do you think he is telling the truth now? Reid and Pelosi were arm and arm" with W when the Iraq war vote came, same as now.Careful logs, you are getting involved with circular logic and events."7) Wanted to give $700 billion to fat cat scam artists who borrowed and sold derivatives based on mortgages."Remember that the Democrats are leading this bill through congress, and the Republicans voted against it, along with 94 democrats. Olny 64 republicans voted for this bill. So it would seem that the Democrats, George Bush, Obama, and McCain are all for this crap, and you are wrong somehwere along the line.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""4) Cutting taxes for the super rich (cap gains and income taxes), the same super rich that would now want us to bail them out to the tune of $700 billion."Thjat would actually raise more capital for this issue than this "bailout bill" would do. A capital gains limitation is exactly what Obama is considering as well, because even a liberal like him knows that liquidity means money.

jhawkchisox 6 years, 9 months ago

Only 5 Investment banks allowed to be levered 40 to 1. Bear, Lehman, Merrill, Morgan, Goldman. If that doesn't that make you upset I don't know what will. The SEC helped fuel this.http://skillanalytics.wordpress.com/2008/09/18/leverage-killed-the-investment-bank-star/

Steve Jacob 6 years, 9 months ago

Will see how the Republicans feel about not approving the bailout when the September unemployment numbers come out friday. I swear it it will hit 7% or even higher before the election.

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

Larry, larry, larry. Not all homeowners have Helocs, and responsible homeowners would never put their equity at risk by treating it like it was an ATM. As we have seen in the last two years, the increase in the value of a home, the basis of a HELOC, is variable. A HELOC is always, always, a bad idea. I am so happy for you that you paid more in capital gains than I did. That just means I was smarter in my investing than you were.By the way, I will vote "no" on the tax for the T, early, and as often as a lazy poll watcher will allow.

pinecreek 6 years, 9 months ago

Well while some of our vengeance seeking friends seek retribution against those that created the mess (they won't suffer, by the way) those of us with 401(k)s as a big part of our retirement foundation suffer yet another blow this year. Thanks Nancy Boyda, real informed vote there...I'll be sending some money Jenkins' way even though I'm not in your district. Ignorant short-sighted thinking, sort of like some bankers that we've been reading about.

Sigmund 6 years, 9 months ago

"U.S. Reps. Nancy Boyda, D-Topeka, Jerry Moran, R-Hays, and Todd Tiahrt, R-Goddard voted against the financial markets bill."Nancy, I haven't been a fan but standing up to your leadership was VERY principled and gutsy. I left my number with your office earlier today. Stick to your guns and then feel free to call me for a contribution and to actively work for your campaign. This issue goes way beyond Reps v. Dems which are really meaningless terms today.

Sigmund 6 years, 9 months ago

sanrat and Agnostick the DJI dropped 777 point (about 7%) today. Oil dropped to $96/barrel and is falling. Which will impact you more in the next year or two?Those that can't afford the homes they are in need to get out. Those that can afford a home need to buy them for the new lower costs. It is ugly and scary and we are far better off doing this now.An exercise for the reader: Each time the bailout plan looked like it would pass oil went up. Each time it failed oil dropped. Why? How are oil and bad Fannies related. Hint: Oil going down hurts Russia, UAE, Venezuela, etc.Staff04, the majority did not want this bailout and Obama and Dennis will pay the price at the polls. americandreamrealty, I think the experts also suggested a young brash American produced Chianti to go with brain goo.

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

Keep the pressure on your representatives. The freshman Dems were given permission by Pelosi to vote Nay in order to save their seats. This vote was window dressing. Hold their feet to the fire. This bill will reappear no later than Thursday, no doubt with even more liberal pork. Tell your reps that if they cave in and vote Yay for any form of this socialist monstrosity, you will vote them out.The Constitution is at stake. Defend it.

JerryStubbs 6 years, 9 months ago

Here is a synopsis of whats in the bill:Doling the money out: The $700 billion would be disbursed in stages, with $250 billion made available immediately for the Treasury's use. Authority to use the money would expire on Dec. 31, 2009, unless Congress certifies a one-year extensionProtecting taxpayers: The ultimate cost to the taxpayer is not expected to be near the amount the Treasury invests in the program. That's because the government would buy assets that have underlying value.Stemming foreclosures: The bill calls for the government, as an owner of a large number of mortgage securities, to exert influence on loan servicers to modify more troubled loans.Limiting executive pay: Curbs would be placed on the compensation of executives at companies that sell mortgage assets to the Treasury. Among them, companies that participate will not be able to deduct the salary they pay to executives above $500,000.Overseeing the program: The bill would establish two oversight boards.

Sigmund 6 years, 9 months ago

supertrampofkansas (Anonymous) says: "Well so much for McCain's leadership on the issue. Now you have to wonder what his advisors will say since they were saying earlier that today's "successful" vote will vindicate John McCain and show him as a true leader."Where was Obama's leadership? At least McCain help delay this till people get a sense of what is being proposed NOTHING needs to be done. Truth is only some banks are bad, the good ones are buying the bad and only those behind on their mortgages are in trouble. Let Fannie and Freddie fend for themselves. It is NOT a program that should continue.Now would be a VERY good time to read, "Atlas Shrugged" or "Basic Economics, Third Edition" by Thomas Sowell.Here is the "Sigmund Plan" (tm). Gather all the bad Fannie and Freddie paper, bundle together in a Real Estate Investment Trust or Exchange Traded Fund. Sell it to wealthy investors (those who have risk capital) for the current market price. The Federal Government can give added tax deductions if the investors lose money and tax advantages on income or gains if any. In essence the government should break up Fannie and Freddie (like ATT) and sell off the baby Mae's to the highest buidder. Then start looking at Sallie Mae and the abuses there.

Sigmund 6 years, 9 months ago

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says: "So now the congressional republicans, the congressional democrats and the Bush Administration will all come up with 3 very different competing proposals."Let the debate begin as there hasn't been any debate yet! Let the bills see the light of day, don't do this over the weekend without telling the American people what is being proposed. The longer this drags out and stocks adjust their prices downward, the less there will be a need for a bailout anyway. I would rather be poorer now than obligated for decades to a bailout.just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says: "Looks like McCain will be off the campaign trail indefinitely."Actually that might be best. Most McCain supporters were going to vote against Obama and not really for McCain. Anyway this issue is FAR more important than who gets to be President for next 4 years. This issue could have enslaved generations of Americans for decades or longer. The longer this issue remains alive, the more the American people know the WHY and the WHO, the more Obama will suffer in the polls especially if he continues to support this.

Sigmund 6 years, 9 months ago

logrithmic (Anonymous) says:"The bank would operate as a non-profit government agency not unlike Social Security."Social Security which is a model of fiscal responsibility! It is the Congress who got us into this. Anyone who believes they are the answer is brain dead.logrithmic (Anonymous) says:"The bank I'm proposing would be a taxpayer owned bank and would not work on a profit motive but to be of service to the people of the United States."And I propose I be in charge of such a bank! Seriously, can you point to such a bank either currently or in the past? I purpose repealing the law of gravity so that when your bubble bursts you aren't killed to death from the fall.

jumpin_catfish 6 years, 9 months ago

So Pelosi couldn't even get her fellow demos to vote for this thing but its the repubs that are to blame. Yes, business as usual in DC and exactly the reason we the people need more choices come election day. What a joke.

jhawkchisox 6 years, 9 months ago

For people that are against this bailout you are misinformed and/or ignorant.Banks aren't lending to each other because they don't trust each others' Balance Sheets because of fear of defaults (not getting their invetsments back). The Credit Markets have nearly frozen and what the government was going to do with the $700B was buy up companies bad assets at today's Market Value and these companies would still be forced to write down their assets and take large Net Losses. Companies would then have a better understanding of each others' Balance Sheets (the risk of default goes way down) and they would begin lending to each other. Liquidity would enter the market, companies would be able to raise much needed capital and meet their obligations. The $700B isn't a gift from taxpayers to the government, it's an INVESTMENT. The government will hold the $700B and when the assets it purchases in this transaction go up in value (they will they are at bargain basement prices today) the $700B will GO UP IN VALUE and you will get more than you gave back.By not passing this:1. Credit markets freeze (Large Banks can't raise capital, have trouble operating, downsize and default).2. More defaults leads to the FDIC getting involved (taxpayer money anyway).3. More layoffs (Unemployment is going to up to 10%)4. Incredibly high rates for ANY loan (car, house).We are in a recession, the probability for a DEPRESSION went up greatly today.In 3 or 4 weeks we will see Unemployment rise drastically. It's really really sad to see politicians who have no economic background make decisions that will cost HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of jobs.

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

none2, I actually care more about my childrens' and grandchildrens' freedom than I care about my creature comforts right now.Continuing to live as though debt were income is not the answer to a problem that was caused by excessive debt.It is time to stop using credit cards to pay off other credit cards, it is time to return to personal responsibility and accountability for everyone, including corrupt politicians.

supertrampofkansas 6 years, 9 months ago

"Where was Obama's leadership? At least McCain help delay this till people get a sense of what is being proposed nothing needs to be done." -- SigmundBut but but Obama...At first it was McCain is going to close the deal, McCain approves the bailout, McCain will get credit for rescuing the economy. Now we have McCain is slowing it down to analyze the situation, McCain says whoa we gots to know what were doing here people, McCain wants to proceed cautiously to make sure we do the right thing...Well come on guys what is it. Why doesn't he pick a position and stick with it instead of changing his position to fit what is happening from hour to hour. He went from the economy being fundamentally sound to let's fire the SEC Chairman. I'm not trying to blame any one person for this crisis, I'm just getting tired of listening to you all spin everything that is nothing more than just politics as usual on both sides of the aisle.On the actual economy crisis, I think the problem is little bit more complex than "let's make wall street pay for it!" No matter what happens, we will all be affected. As chocolateplease points out we will have to choose our poison carefully.

ASBESTOS 6 years, 9 months ago

"And tonight, to the growing list of personal shortcomings of the good Senator McCain, we can now add counting chickens before they hatch."No Snotty, that would be the Reid /Pelosi "leadership". even a first year congressman knows that you have to "have the votes" before you bring the bill to a vote.That is how it is done.Pelosi let this many democrats vote "no";5 democratic committee chairmen15 Democratic Congressmen in "Challanged congressional districts"13 Democratic subcommittee chairman, and7 democratic California Congressmen.NOw what was gong on her was "politics" and that was the Dems would get to be "safe" in the challanged districts by voting NO, and the Republicans were supposed to "haul the water for the bill. The Republicans would risk their "Challanged Congressinoal seats".Remember in both the Democratic Party and Republican Party the response to this "bailout bill" is 99 against to 1 supporting from the constituency.Dodd, Franks, Pelsoi, and Reid combined with their "bill buddy": George W. Bush, thought they could rams this thing through with No hearings."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""By not passing this:1. Credit markets freeze (Large Banks can't raise capital, have trouble operating, downsize and default).2. More defaults leads to the FDIC getting involved (taxpayer money anyway).3. More layoffs (Unemployment is going to up to 10%)4. Incredibly high rates for ANY loan (car, house)."Who says? I know of 300 different economics progessors that are begging for this bill not to go through.It is more important to have "possession of our country" than to worry about the dollars.Country First!

John Hamm 6 years, 9 months ago

Ah somebody hit the nail on the head and reminded us it was Congress (Republican congresses) that pushed through all the deregulation that's brought us to this sorry state.Thank you Jefferson_county.

Jennifer Nikkila Pressgrove 6 years, 9 months ago

The most educated argument I've read is that this crisis stems from an attempt of the government to provide affordable housing to everybody in the late 90s and early 00s. Fanny and Freddie were buying up sub-prime mortgages by the thousands and encouraging banks to give our mortgages to people with poor credit or no credit. When advisors came to Congress and said that there needed to be regulation on Fannie and Freddie they were laughed at because at that point the two companies were making money for the government. Housing is just like college, being a home owner is for some and it's not for others. (That's why affirmative action doesn't work in either case)This is a classic case study we'll find in free-market economics books for years to come. You can argue against the "free-market" all you want, but it seems like it's following the curve that it's supposed too right now...too much supply, too little demand, time to adjust. Now we all lose.

NoSpin 6 years, 9 months ago

I don't recall Bosnia or Kosovo having WMDs and we have been there for over 13 years!

staff04 6 years, 9 months ago

Sigmund, I might have misread your statement. Did you mean the Majority party or the majority of Congress? I had to assume you meant the majority party, as you noted that only Dennis and Obama would be hurt by this bill failing but made no mention of the 65 Republicans that supported the bill...

ASBESTOS 6 years, 9 months ago

"I can't explain the gullibility of the House leadership, but I will point out that 90 progressive Democraps stood up and said hell no. And it wasn't because they were afraid of losing their seats - unlike the rightwingers."That is rich and partisian. ALL the Rs and Ds are worried about losing their seats. That 94 count on the Dems (Blue dawgs) are either "Conservative Democrats" or they are the liberal variety that want loads of pork in the bill. Whatever they are they voted with the constituents today along with 134 R's, and beat this bill.

laphroaig 6 years, 9 months ago

"Here's a free tip: Invest in AR-15s and gold."Never thought I'd agree with invictus, but after today I did one of the two

Sigmund 6 years, 9 months ago

staff04 (Anonymous) says: "Sigmund, I might have misread your statement. Did you mean the Majority party or the majority of Congress?"The majority of Americans and the majority of both parties as it turns out.

BigPrune 6 years, 9 months ago

They need to jack up the housing prices. They need to make it advantageous to buy a home. The can do this by changing the tax code to allow people to depreciate the full purchase price of a house over 5 years. It could apply to someone buying a second home as an investment property. If people have to pay income taxes they'd have nothing to lose. The housing prices will go up overnight. The mortgages will be secure because now they will be under the amount the house is valued. The housing prices before were not out of line. People in deep in their house would be able to sell their homes without selling short or getting foreclosed.Simple, simple, simple. The Feds could inject $100 million to get it started. Crisis averted. Please write Congress with this idea and save America.

BigPrune 6 years, 9 months ago

Make that $100 Billion instead of $100 million. It's still better than $700 billion.

BrianR 6 years, 9 months ago

The market is fluctuating wildly as in closes in a few minutes. A very interesting day.

staff04 6 years, 9 months ago

"majority of both parties"So my first statement stands--140 Democrats in the House (that's almost 60%, which is a majority of the majority party) voted for the bill. You either don't have a clue or are lying. I'll let you tell us which.

jhawkchisox 6 years, 9 months ago

Chocolateplease: Thank you for being a voice of reason around here.Add that to the fact that the Fed allowed 5 (and only 5)investment banks to become levered 40 to 1.Bear, Lehman, Merrill, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman. 3 down, 2 to go.Add that to the fact that Fannie and Freddie were levered 50 to 1.For the uneducated 50 to 1 leverage means that you have 50 dollars of debt for every 1 dollar of equity. When the $50 loses $5 and becomes worth $5 you have -$4 of equity. Too much risk, too much greed.

jonas_opines 6 years, 9 months ago

Lisa: "Look on the bright side, Dad. Did you know that the Chinese use the same word for 'crisis' as they do for 'opportunity?'I hope you will take this kindly, but it's not true. The word for opportunity in Chinese, at least modern Chinese, is jihui, which means "vehicle/machine for ability," more or less. The word for crisis (which I admit that I had to look up in my dictionary) is weiji, which means "vehicle/machine of danger." The "ji" character is the same in both cases. I think the true cross is the word for "risk," weixian, which is the same as the word for "danger" in most cases. We in the western business world have different notions of risk, for the most part.

Sigmund 6 years, 9 months ago

none2 (Anonymous) says: "I think many of you opposed to a bailout are forgetting some of the ramifications. Our lifestyle has been based on borrowing from foreigners such as the Chinese. This is true both in trade deficit as well as government borrowing. IF they choose to spend their savings elsewhere, then it will hurt us."I haven't forgotten at all. They bought bad paper let them eat it. The Chinese sold us inferior products and we bought with inferior paper. Fair IS Fair! My lifestyle isn't based on borrowing from anyone. Still if it is the price we have to pay, better today than a year from now.none2 (Anonymous) says: "Likewise, if OPEC feels like the US dollar is unstable and switch to trading oil in another currency such as the Euro, then again, it will negatively affect our country."Really how will pricing oil in a different currency hurt us? Please explain why every time this bill looked like it would pass oil went UP, and each time it was delayed or voted down oil went DOWN. I'll take a lower DJIA and lower price for oil any day!!! There is a simple answer for why.Buying bad home loans got banks in trouble and they failed. Explain why it is now a "good idea" that the taxpayers should be FORCED to buy bad home loans? If the government wants to invest taxpayer dollars in home loans, buy should buy the GOOD home loans.Repackage the Fannie and Freddie loans from the failed banks. Mark them clearly "Not Guaranteed by the US Government nor Federal Agency." Auction them for pennies on the dollar and let wealthy investors buy as much or as little as they like. Keep lowering the price till they are all sold. (I'll buy my share at 50 cents on the dollar). If investors experience loss let them take a tax deduction, if they make a profit let them pay income and capital gain taxes. The key is the government screwed this up and can NOT be trusted to fix it. Fannie and Freddie must NOT survive! Restructure and sell off Sallie Mae as well. Do it now!

ASBESTOS 6 years, 9 months ago

Pelosi let this many democrats vote "no";5 democratic committee chairmen15 Democratic Congressmen in "Challanged congressional districts"13 Democratic subcommittee chairman, and7 democratic California Congressmen.

JohnBrown 6 years, 9 months ago

Niles, thanks, first sane comments on this board.And to INVICTUS, I guess you and al Queda have a lot in common, wanting NYC to burn as you do.For all you glib conservatives out there, ok, game on. Let's see how the credit market does in the next little while. Let's see how many people end up out of work because of your "clinging" to your short-sighted philosophy of lawless free markets. Just stop...pause.......and feel how it feels to be Nero.

true_patriot 6 years, 9 months ago

Agreed. We need something smaller and more targeted than a bail out of Wall Street under threat of extortion by Bush and the power players on Wall Street.The same players that cleaned up over the last several years since McCain's economic advisor Phil Gram wrote the Gram-Leach-Bliley act to remove oversight and deregulate the financial sector are already jockeying in position to try steal even more public taxpayer money in the government bail out of the aftermath of their deregulated Vegas-style betting frenzy.Does this sound familiar at all? Congress needs to act immediately. There is no time for debate - we can point fingers later. Just give us the money (authorization to go to war, retroactive immunity for corporations that helped illegally spy on Americans without any warrants, etc.) and trust us. Don't worry, you can take our word on it that your towns will go broke (there are WMD in Iraq, we won't abuse the power to do domestic spying without warrants, etc.).Word is that desperate corporations on Wall Street are contacting members of Congress and threatening to make sure the 401K and 403B retirement plans that many of their middle-class constituents have will among the first to detonate if Congress refuses to use taxpayer money to bail out the fat cats and power players that destroyed our financial sector in the quest for insane and unsupportable levels of profit.

james bush 6 years, 9 months ago

Just saw Huckabee responding to the odiously arrogant Allan Coombs and it makes me think that Huck should have been the republican presidential nominee....like the time when Reagan came in 2nd to Jerry Ford and when McCain, 2nd to Bush 8 years ago.Republicans seem to be running one cycle behind and that's to the RNC's shame and to the country's detriment..........now that it's on the verge of electing a marxist who espoused for 20 years the Rev Wright's philosophy: Nah, Nah Nah!....not God Bless America...............but God damn America!

BitterClinger 6 years, 9 months ago

Headlines like these is one of the reasons I canceled this damned paper. Swallowing the AP's poisoned pablum and passing on to your readers without question or thought is disgraceful.I'm relieved the bailout failed to pass. I'm glad so many senators listened to their constituents. Moore should be ashamed of himself. Every one of those who voted for the bailout should be voted out of office.

jaywalker 6 years, 9 months ago

logrithmic:"Everyone should know that the rightwing RepubLICKlans are primarily responsible for this debacle."It was nice while it lasted, but log is back to prove that bozo, dupedaplenty, and beatrice aren't alone when it comes to blissful ignorance.Dodd and Franks (Dems) were supposed to be our oversight into these companies. Carter then Clinton and a host of liberal proponents pushed the CDA and forced the issue of loans to people who had little to no hope of paying them, not to mention sticking their noses into the middle of the free market and screwing us all to hell. Bush has attempted at least 12 times since '03 to create oversight for the Mac's, only to be re-buffed time and again. And at least two of BO's 'economic adivisers', including Franklin Rains, walked away with highly questionable bonuses from these failed orgs that far exceeded their salaries.Nearly everyone on the Hill bears some responsibilty for this travesty. But only an absolutely uninformed, intellectually stunted individual would vomit that it was 'primarily' the Republicans fault.

jonas_opines 6 years, 9 months ago

Although I'm afraid I don't belong in this conversation. I'm a man of reasonably humble means, apparently. I couldn't afford to buy any of you out, probably. For shame, for shame.

americandreamrealty 6 years, 9 months ago

If we're going to throw $700 billion in subsidies into the economy, we should put it into the real economy, rather than the secondary economy (a derivative of real production). Generate some real jobs with that money, rather than give to the financial industries to gain more usurious (sp?) profits on the exploitation of poorly capitalized individuals. Take some real steps to end the debtor economy. An economy based on debt is unsustainable.

JHOK32 6 years, 9 months ago

Endless Republican greed will destroy this nation yet. This is what we get for voting in a Republican President who comes from a wealthy family with very close ties to big oil, big banks, and millionaire buddies. The taxpayers (us) are already paying for a $600 Billion dollar war that 70% of us don't want, while the big oil companies make historic record profits. Then they cram $4 a gallon gas down our throats. Now we're expected to pay for all the greedy millions the big bankers have already made. This is the party that is against big government? Give me a break! Next you'll be trying to sell me that Iraq has WMD's!

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

Cleaver is on the committee that is charged with oversight of Fannie and Freddie, has been for nearly 4 years. He bragged that he was able to get loans for people who could not afford them.

volunteer 6 years, 9 months ago

One would wonder what agenda Nancy Pelosi had for poisoning the spirit of bipartisanship, except she had the deer in the headlights look. Yahoo News has it captured.Will this week's Saturday Night Live include a parody skit of her?

ASBESTOS 6 years, 9 months ago

How about the $338 billion the illegal aliens are costing us each year?

chocolateplease 6 years, 9 months ago

jhawkchisox: You said "Add that to the fact that the Fed allowed 5 (and only 5)investment banks to become levered 40 to 1. Bear, Lehman, Merrill, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman. 3 down, 2 to go. Add that to the fact that Fannie and Freddie were levered 50 to 1."Really? Source? Why only 5? That is something.

jmadison 6 years, 9 months ago

40 percent of Democrats voted against this bill, 33 per cent of Republicans voted for this bill.

Sigmund 6 years, 9 months ago

The silver lining is oil dropped to $96/barrel! As long as this bill is opposed oil will decline. It was artificially high at $150.barrel just two months ago! NO BAILOUT, let the investors take the hit! Why should the government buy bad loans, shouldn't they buy good loans? Look for oil to be $50/barrel in a year and gas at $2.50/gallon next summer.NO BAILOUT!!!!!!!

staff04 6 years, 9 months ago

"Staff04 goes partisan to defend the most poisonously partisan crook in the House. Way to go."Boehner said exactly that, Godot. He said that they had the votes until Nancy Pelosi spoke. Several members who didn't like the tone of her speech decided they were no longer going to support the bill.They specifically ignored the best interest of the American people because they "didn't like the tone" of Pelosi's speech.You want to talk partisan? THAT's partisan.You must live a happy life in the absence of facts...

jhawkchisox 6 years, 9 months ago

I sure hope the Sox can win tomorrow, although I'm not planning on it. I hate the Twins almost as much as i hate financial ignorance.

BigDog 6 years, 9 months ago

daveclear,exactly right ..... the link below shows the hearing on freddie mac and fannie mae ..... and believe it or not it was Republicans who were pushing for more regulation and oversight.McCain pushed legislation on this issue in 2006 but legislation was blocked from coming up for a vote.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3p1Wc2NFa3w

staff04 6 years, 9 months ago

Funny, I didn't realize that trying to keep people from losing their homes was criminal.Godot, you jumped the shark with that one.

chargdup 6 years, 9 months ago

This is great. I'm very, very pleased with this turnout.Shame on Dennis Moore for voting for Wall Street welfare. Go Boyda!

chocolateplease 6 years, 9 months ago

Is a total economic meltdown, perhaps world-wide, worth it? When companies start shutting their doors (not just banks), and people start getting laid off by the million, and governments can't collect taxes let alone offer much help to those in real need, will that be worth rejecting a bailout plan? Can we believe the doomsayers?Hey, I want blood from the greedy wrong-doers too, but isn't it best to be pragmatic and do what is in our long-term best interest? The free-market system is wonderful, but it isn't perfect, and it isn't god-ordained. Maybe this is needed in these extrordinary circumstances. I frankly do not know.But I submit to you that items such as regularion, CEO pay, punishment for CEOs, oversight, and even homeowner bailouts for the loans they can't pay are SIDE-issues at this point, and can be dealt with later if not now. The critical thing is to prevent a total economic catastrophe. Now of course, if you don't believe the brink-of-disaster proclaimers, or if you only want blood (from the wrong-doers), and couldn't give a hoot about the rest of it, then I see your point. I just hope the suffering isn't worse by rejecting this plan than it would be by accepting it. Choose your poison carefully!

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

staff04, this bill would not have helped people stay in their homes. This bill would have helped investors and bankers and pension fund and those seeking to borrow money in the future. The losers would have been the taxpayers and current homeowners, whether they have a mortgage or not.http://www.cnbc.com/id/26931088/for/cnbc/

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

staff04, there is no social security fund. The Treasury spent what small amount remained, and more, on Bear Stearn, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, not to mention the $630 BN that was pumped into the banks last night. If Barney Frank had gotten his additional $700 BN, that would mean over $1.3 Trilliion pumped into the banking system in two days. On top of that, we have the $6 trillion for Fannie and Freddie. There is no more money, other than that which can be confiscated from private savings and investments. Make no mistake, the Dems have their greedy little eyes on those nest eggs, too.

RedwoodCoast 6 years, 9 months ago

As I recall, we went into Iraq for the purpose of procuring Saddam's alleged WMD's. I was only a teenager when the Bosnia and Kosovo things went down, but I seem to recall going in there for very different--and very clear--reasons.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years, 9 months ago

So now the congressional republicans, the congressional democrats and the Bush Administration will all come up with 3 very different competing proposals.Looks like McCain will be off the campaign trail indefinitely.

Sigmund 6 years, 9 months ago

logrithmic (Anonymous) says: "Everyone should know that the rightwing RepubLICKlans are primarily responsible for this debacle."Doesn't pass the laugh or the smell test, still keep shouting it loudly and with venom. Somebody might just believe it.

ASBESTOS 6 years, 9 months ago

"The Washington Post reports that of those members who voted in favor of the bailout, only 2 are in highly contested re-election races, while those who voted against it are almost entirely up for re-election in competitive situations."Thank you chocolateplease, that was the point. The electorate hate this plan and the elected have to carry out their wishes.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""So when rightwingers have the sheer gall to come on to this forum and spout that this is a bipartisan problem and that Democraps who voted for Herr Bush's plan to rescue the economy are somehow responsible for the years of deregulation and "free market" ideology of the rightwing, well, I can tell you simply, it's a load of bowel movement."No logs, they are correct. IT is called the Community Reinvestment act that decoupled housing values from the CPI and the dollar. DOdd, Kerry, Frank, and Clinton all supported it as well as Schummer. ALL opposed McCains effort to shore up and tighten up Fannie and Freddie. Cry all you want and hate GOPers all you want, but it does not change the video footage of two days on the Senate floor, nor the senate record either. Dems wanted the Community Reinvestment Act to buy votes.There was a great video on Youtube called "What caused the financial crisis". It is taken down due to dopyright violations, but it was a good one, and explained it all.

Daytrader23 6 years, 9 months ago

My shorts are doing GREAT. Thank you congress. You made me a richer man. I love my job.

NoSpin 6 years, 9 months ago

Obama wants to review the bailout the first day as prez- isn't that a little too late? He should be in Washington with his "bipartisan" charisma getting a plan that is really for the people. He thinks it's a waste of time to be in Washington for one of the most important financial decisions in American history. Maybe I should agree with him for the first time. It would be a waste!

ASBESTOS 6 years, 9 months ago

Here's the video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NU6fuFrdCJYPlease watch. This is where it all started from and continued to grow like a cancer through our economy artifically inflating housing prices. The economy will not "stabalize" until houses hit "real market value". Even the paper loans are not valued correctly.

supertrampofkansas 6 years, 9 months ago

Well so much for McCain's leadership on the issue. Now you have to wonder what his advisors will say since they were saying earlier that today's "successful" vote will vindicate John McCain and show him as a true leader.This from William Kristol:"Assuming the legislation passes soon, and assuming it reassures financial markets, McCain will be able to take some credit."And if it doesn't pass? Does McCain take responsibility for that too or is it "them blasted Demonrats fault"? All that time spent on the phone and not a thing to show for it. Should we expect another suspension of his campaign? Seems like a good strategy to me, keep riding in on the white horse all the way up to Nov. 4th.

Jefferson_County 6 years, 9 months ago

Evidently all of the previous posters are retiring on Social Security payments. Good luck with that. $700 billion - let's see, we've spent that much in Iraq, didn't hear the "free markets" express much concern about that. Years and years of Repug deregulation and help for the "fat cats" coming to a head, and ordinary peoples' retirement suffers. Typical cut off the nose to spite the face.

americandreamrealty 6 years, 9 months ago

Lisa: "Look on the bright side, Dad. Did you know that the Chinese use the same word for 'crisis' as they do for 'opportunity?'"Homer: "Yes. 'Crisitunity!'"

Shane Garrett 6 years, 9 months ago

"October surprise", mentioned by the Geekin Topekan. This thesis I have heard before. I think it read something like suspended elections and martial law, thus keeping Bush in power.

staff04 6 years, 9 months ago

Godot, she didn't have the votes last week. In fact, if they had brought the President's proposal to the floor last week it would have failed by an even greater margin.I would encourage you to look into the process some and find out how much power was taken away from the Secretary of the Treasury compared to what the White House and Treasury asked for in their proposal.Anyway, I imagine that you are thrilled now that the Republicans weren't successful in privatizing Social Security, because that is the only thing that is going to be left for a lot of retirees...

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

If this were such an emergency, such a crisis, why didn't the Speaker of the House bring the bill to the floor for a vote last week when she had the votes?I guess she made a bad, bad strategic error when she decided it wasn't such an emergency that she couldn't wait to try to get Republicans to cover her. Did anyone notice that, over night, the Federal Reserve pumped another $630 Billion into the banking system? Where did the Fed get the money? Is that $630 Billion on top of the $700 billion requested in the failed bill?The truth is, that Congress gave the Treasury Sec the power to spend as much as he wants, on whatever he wants, with the passage of HR 3221. Apparently, it wasn't enough power to satisfy him/Goldman Sachs/Barney Frank, et al. They had to have more.Paulson doesn't need this bill, unless it is to cement his, and Congress', power over the entire US economy.Thomas Jefferson must be cheering in his grave right about now. Today we had the equivalent of the Boston Tea Party, only we dumped junk financial instruments like MBS and CDO's instead of tea.

Tom McCune 6 years, 9 months ago

A Democratic congress is not going to approve a Bush bailout plan a month before the presidential election. The Democrats are going to punish the Bush neocons with this right up to election day. As emotionally gratifying as I find that as a traditional Republican, I hope they don't push it too far....

ASBESTOS 6 years, 9 months ago

"Both parties (and the greedy wrongdoers on Wall Street) are to blame for this, not just one. During Clinton years, they pushed Greenspan to keep lowering interest rates while pushing Freddie and Fannie to keep pumping out loans to those least qualified to take them. The housing market was on fire:. you could speculate on a bunch of houses, take an ARM, then sell for a giant profit just when the ARM took a jump in the rate. So much for that theory."Thank you chocolateplease, you are correct.

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

Well, jonas, that is what this so-called crises boils down to, isn't it?

RogueThrill 6 years, 9 months ago

You should stop beating around the bush niles. How do you really feel?

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

Bravo to the Republicans and Democrats who voted to kill this monstrously unconstitutional piece of socialism.Shame, shame on everyone who has made this a partisan issue. The deepest of shame must be heaped upon Nancy Pelosi for her willingness to risk the well being of our country in order to save her partisan neck.This bill deserved to die. I hope it is never again brought before the House of Representatives.Now, lets put Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and Hank Paulson under investigation and get on with business.

Jack Hope III 6 years, 9 months ago

Looks like I might be living on Ramen noodles again soon. Thankfully, I don't think they are made with Chinese milk. This is going to be just like college, but the tests will mean a little more, I think.Of course, I'm already poor, and the Depression seemed like a pretty romantic time. I think I might go buy some John Steinbeck books before we start burning them warmth. It's good to be prepared in both cases.Too be honest, I'm not terribly worried. I've been poor for years. I haven't had much confidence in the government recently, so why should I be surprised.See you all at the soup kitchen. I'll be the one with the half-burned copy of the Grapes of Wrath.

staff04 6 years, 9 months ago

"Staff04, the majority did not want this bailout."141 Democrats voted to pass this bailout package, so at best, your statement here is grossly uninformed if not patently false. I hope for the former, but frankly...

ASBESTOS 6 years, 9 months ago

The ignorance on these posts from the left truley boggle the mind. Did you Democrats get the $50 billion dollars for Acorn and La Raza?90 democrats did not vote for this POS either.I have an answer, 8% bonds, like Savings bonds. That is what we needed to do with the war finance and also what we need to do with this finace. we simply cannot sideline $700 billion in the banks, and have it "taken out" of the general Public.

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 9 months ago

I'm really glad that it didn't pass although my congressman voted for it! Dennis Moore needs to be gone from Congress. Vote next month accordingly. And thanks to Nancy Pelosi for her partisan politicking that really torqued everyone off. She's just freakingly amazingly stupid. Everything she says is just wrong. Today's a great day!

LiberalDude 6 years, 9 months ago

The Bush/McCain bailout plan is crap. I'm glad that it failed. Thank you Nancy Pelosi!!! (tic)

Scott Drummond 6 years, 9 months ago

As if it was needed after 8 years, but another bit of evidence from yesterday's news about the morality of the Republicans. "Republicans have filed suit in several states to prevent people whose home has been foreclosed from voting on the grounds that the address they gave when they registered is no longer valid."

staff04 6 years, 9 months ago

"The freshman Dems were given permission by Pelosi to vote Nay in order to save their seats."Two things Godot: 1) How do you know this? Were you present at the members only caucus meeting? If so, I stand humbled by your unprecedented access to Congress.2) Based on this, it would stand to reason that John Boehner gave a pass to 133 of his members for the same purpose, right? Or is it the case that since they are Republicans, the MUST have been representing the will of the people and had no interest in saving their asses?

jonas_opines 6 years, 9 months ago

Godot: I'm afraid I didn't get to your analysis in any great depth (though what I saw was articulately expressed, of course), but I got great enjoyment out of you suddenly becoming a socialist in the somewhat askew view of Larry the Moocher.

jonas_opines 6 years, 9 months ago

My guess is C, as in debt is going to be the catalyzer of the fatal chain of events that leads to the fall of the American Dynasty, but I've already played frisbee at the park today.

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

My dear Niles, the reason the market swings on the slightest utterance of the Fed is not because the Fed is poputated by economic geniuses, but because the Fed has power that is unchecked by Congress and the Executive.

Satirical 6 years, 9 months ago

I would like to thank Nancy Pelosi for her partisan speech shortly before the vote yesterday which undermined the attempted bi-partisan effort to pass this bill. If it weren't for Pelosi, Congressional Republicans may have actually voted for this bill, causing it to pass.

Godot 6 years, 9 months ago

"Republicans have filed suit in several states to prevent people whose home has been foreclosed from voting on the grounds that the address they gave when they registered is no longer valid."This is way off topic.Nevertheless, considering that the law requires you to re-register when you move, what is wrong with that? You dems want people to vote several times, don't you?

Scott Drummond 6 years, 9 months ago

"I take joy when NY collapses under it's own greed. Unlike Al queda a don't condone violence of any kind. I am a peaceful man."And not a particularly bright man. If "NY" collapses, so will the entire country. That is what the grownups are trying to prevent. Yes, our money will go to mop up after a bunch of rich criminals, but a bailout will also serve to stabilize and preserve the country. Those responsible will can be called to task in the political process and the vast majority of Americans will not suffer hardship. If we follow the childish and political "leadership" of the House Republicans and John McCain, we will live to rue the day.

twinetowngirl 6 years, 9 months ago

I have not read all the comments on here. This comes from Daveramsey.com Please check out his website and if you think this could work, email your sen. and reps TODAY! The Common Sense FixYears of bad decisions and stupid mistakes have created an economic nightmare in this country,but $700 billion in new debt is not the answer. As a tax-paying American citizen, I will not supportany congressperson who votes to implement such a policy. Instead, I submit the following threestepCommon Sense Plan.I. INSURANCEa. Insure the subprime bonds/mortgages with an underlying FHA-type insurance.Government-insured and backed loans would have an instant market all over theworld, creating immediate and needed liquidity.b. In order for a company to accept the government-backed insurance, they must do twothings:1. Rewrite any mortgage that is more than three months delinquent to a6% fixed-rate mortgage.a. Roll all back payments with no late fees or legal costs into thebalance. This brings homeowners current and allows them achance to keep their homes.b. Cancel all prepayment penalties to encourage refinancing orthe sale of the property to pay off the bad loan. In the event offoreclosure or short sale, the borrower will not be held liablefor any deficit balance. FHA does this now, and thatencourages mortgage companies to go the extra mile whileworking with the borrower-again limiting foreclosures andruined lives.2. Cancel ALL golden parachutes of EXISTING and FUTURE CEOs andexecutive team members as long as the company holds thesegovernment-insured bonds/mortgages. This keeps underperformingexecutives from being paid when they don't do their jobs.c. This backstop will cost less than $50 billion-a small fraction of the current proposal.II. MARK TO MARKETa. Remove mark to market accounting rules for two years on only subprime Tier IIIbonds/mortgages. This keeps companies from being forced to artificially mark downbonds/mortgages below the value of the underlying mortgages and real estate.b. This move creates patience in the market and has an immediate stabilizing effect onfailing and ailing banks-and it costs the taxpayer nothing.III. CAPITAL GAINS TAXa. Remove the capital gains tax completely. Investors will flood the real estate and stockmarket in search of tax-free profits, creating tremendous-and immediate-liquidity inthe markets. Again, this costs the taxpayer nothing.b. This move will be seen as a lightning rod politically because many will say it is helpingthe rich. The truth is the rich will benefit, but it will be their money that stimulates theeconomy. This will enable all Americans to have more stable jobs and retirementinvestments that go up instead of down.This is not a time for envy, and it's not a time for politics. It's time for all of us, as Americans, tostand up, speak out, and fix this mess.

ASBESTOS 6 years, 9 months ago

"If we follow the childish and political "leadership" of the House Republicans and John McCain, we will live to rue the day."There were enough Dems to pass this legislatino without the Republicans. Spin all you want snotty, the sun will come up tomorrow.Nancy Pelosi showed she has nothing but arrogance and no leadership capabilities. Why on earth would these idiots bring a bill to the house and not have the votes? Somebody colossally stupid and arrogant.And what did that market do? It went up? Hmmmm. Snotty, you need to remove yourself from this "adult discussion" as your childish partisanship and temper tantrums are not "dialouge". Post something when you actually "know" what is going on. You would be the only one. Everybody was betting the market would drop today.AH, how 'bout that $20 billion dollars for ACORN? They are the ones "registering voters" for Obama.Trust me, this Presidential election WILL be contested after the votes have been cast for massive voter fraud. Ohio is particular.

PosseComitatus 6 years, 9 months ago

Here is a link to the new and improved bailout plan all 451 pages of it. A new agency to control deflation, carbon credits, extended tax deductions for business and many other add-ons.http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/01/news/pdf/index.htm

sdinges 6 years, 9 months ago

Check out Posse's link. Do a search on the keyword "children" to zip straight to all the pork. There you will see how our 700 billion dollar economic relief plan contains such important stipulations as tax relief for companies that make toy arrows, rum manufacturers, railroad track and mine maintenance, tax incentives for investing in DC. Of course, who can forget some quick Hurricane Katrina addons and disaster relief money? Oh yes, and we mustn't leave out money for racetracks, or those wool subsidies.Once again our elected officials prove that we simply can't trust the government to act responsibly. I didn't know if I was for or against this bill, but now that I see it, in all it's pork-laden glory, I've come to my senses. How could I ever have thought that these people could handle something this important? Of course they're going to mismanage it. I'm surprised there isn't a bridge to nowhere in this bill.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.