Economic Meltdown

[Urwumpe]

That is a bail out!

 

[ar81]

The debate is:

Buy fixed assets to add liquidity and add an incentive to executives, so taxpayers pay the prices of reckless executive decisions, or let companies to sink and jobs to be lost.

Also the debate is:
Socialist intervention (nationalization of assets) in US vs. capitalism (if you break it, you pay for it)

I am amazed to see how socialist republican party seems to be today...


-----Posted Added-----

That is a bail out!

That's a cheaper bail out, compared to US bail out... :blink:

 

[Urwumpe]

Everybody is a socialist by heart, when it is suddenly HIS money, going down the drain.

 

[ar81]

What if instead of giving away the money, congress approves a loan to those companies, where executives will respond with their own assets (shared responsibility company+executives), so basically they get the money but they will need to pay for it, using personal assets if needed?

That would give liquidity and that would not be a reward for poor decisions? That would be the most capitalist move of all time. If you break it, you pay for it. They would have to pay interests for it to the government.

 

[GregBurch]

SCALE. All of the "executives" combined in all of the implicated institutions don't have even a tiny fraction of the net worth necessary to back a loan to fix the problem.

And, really, you need to stop talking about "giving" money to these institutions. The state will be buying something in return. The only question is valuation. The ultimate transaction is one in risk.

 

[Eagle]

What if instead of giving away the money, congress approves a loan to those companies...

I don't agree with the requiring personal assets as collateral. But I think a low interest Fed Loan would have been a much better idea that what is being done.

 

[JamesG]

That won't fly because Congress wants it both off loading the bad assets off the books of the banks and protective of the mortgage holders. A simple loan won't do that.
I hope they make sure that this is a one timie emergency event and that once the government is able to liquidate these securities, it disengages from owning and just regulates the industry.

 

[Nickmick95]

You've all heard about it, you're all aware of it. What will happen when the economy completely dies? Will the US government collapse? Will people have to go around in cars that have been modified with thick armor plates and machine guns to gather sustenance? Discuss.

To be honest I think there could be a second civil war, not just 2 sides, but 6 or 7.....

 

[Urwumpe]

To be honest I think there could be a second civil war, not just 2 sides, but 6 or 7.....

No. It will be all against Alaska. With Canada complaining about the US army violating Canadian traffic regulations.

 

[tl8]

err, don't you need an army for a civil war?

 

[SlyCoopersButt]

It's anarchy, Not civil war. That would be every man for himself situation.

 

[replicant]

I'm sure everyone saw the debates. From a purely strategic point of view, it looked pretty much like a draw. McCain needed a home run and he didn't get it. Obama managed to do one very important thing though, he turned the race back into one between himself and McCain.

 

[Ghostrider]

err, don't you need an army for a civil war?

No warfare precedes standing armies. You don't need an army to fight a war, you need an army to fight it acceptably.

 

[GregBurch]

I'm sure everyone saw the debates. From a purely strategic point of view, it looked pretty much like a draw. McCain needed a home run and he didn't get it. Obama managed to do one very important thing though, he turned the race back into one between himself and McCain.

Well, the polls this morning seem to give the "victory" in the debate to Obama. Why, I don't know, but there it is ...

 

[Urwumpe]

Well, the polls this morning seem to give the "victory" in the debate to Obama. Why, I don't know, but there it is ...

Maybe they think, it is already a victory for Obama, that McCain did not run away from the debate like a coward. :lol:

 

[GregBurch]

Maybe they think, it is already a victory for Obama, that McCain did not run away from the debate like a coward. :lol:

That's certainly a factor -- Obma's definitely been "anointed" as the victor by the "punditocracy."

 

[Urwumpe]

That's certainly a factor -- Obma's definitely been "anointed" as the victor by the "punditocracy."

Just imagine a debate without McCain. Instead sending Palin to replace him.

 

[Missioncmdr]

Did anyone see Bob Barr's rebuttal to the debate? He was quite good.

 

[fort]

J Mc Cain last night made me think of Joe Frazier. The analogy is not elegant, approximative also, but it is that which came to me.

http://tinyurl.com/2vmnw9


EDIT

I was unaware of, yesterday, by writing these lines, the existence of this article...

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/race...8/09/27/sen-obama-you-re-no-muhammad-ali.aspx

 

[JamesG]

Did anyone see Bob Barr's rebuttal to the debate? He was quite good.

Bob who?