US Congress rejects bail-out

I was surprised as well. Washington has been in bed with these people for years! I thought they would put this thing thru without batting an eye! I think they need to take some time to really weigh the options here.
I just heard the DOW dropped over 700 points! wow! Looks like they were expecting to get bailed out huh!

 

Didn't the American Economy crash today?

 

Some information for the neighbors up North

TSX plunges record 840.93 points after U.S. bailout fails

 

Oh great

 

Banks in Europe are having trouble too. Fortis, Dexia etc.. Australian prime minister asked the US to vote the bail out with no delay. It's about time some people realize this is not a local US Democrat Republic issue : this is about the world economy. Taxpayers in the world are already paying for this , as most countries are will try to save their banks . In 24h we"ll know if Dexia survived or not.

 

Well, I guess the old saying is good here: You´re damned if you do, you´re damned if you don´t.

 

yes, it's a matter of how bad and who goes first.

 

The eternal questions, of

Is this putting a glass of water on a forest fire. The numbers dg quoted before are pretty close. Will 700 bill or even a Trill do anything other than be immediately absorbed and prevent nothing.
Cramer (a Hedge-fund loser) predicts a 3,000 point correction in the DOW, and this is only one quarter of that.
700 bill will
Pay off every student loan in America
Pay for "Five" hurricane Katrina's
The entire Iraq war so far
Is it time for a correction, especially with all the greed & ineffectual leadership who want applause for after-the-fact band aids?

The other side.

Time to do something, leaving partisan sniping alone (hear me Nancy?), come together and earn your pay, and work for the people instead of yourselves and a partisan agenda. Who do you work for anyway?
Many of the no votes came from those who are up for re-election, because they received communications from constituents saying no to a bail-out with no guarantees it will either work, or cascade into a frenzy of others who want theirs too.
Cut our losses, or good money after bad?

tough call

Q. How did we let this get this far.
A. PC? ... aint it worth it.

 

I feel the whole failure of the bailout plan can be blamed on Nancy Polesi, and her taking the time to give a speech about how the whole problem is because of republicans and don't vote for McCain. She angered the republicans so they didn't vote for the bill. This isn't just a US problem but a World problem. I heard that one of them S. American countries stock market, Argentina maybe, dropped 10% immediately after the failure to pass the bill.

 

Fortunately, everything is under control in the UK. We have a Prime Minister who proudly proclaimed 'No more Boom and Bust', and furthermore that the ' fundamentals of the UK economy are sound'.

( Yes - I am being ironic..... )

 

We hear the same things here. Stock Market attacks cannot cross the channel or the Maginot Line. It's scary to have officals who claim they will take care of eveything. What would they do if there is a major crisis anyway? Would they buy every single bank until they go bankrupt themselves?

 

I heard Russia suspended trading today.

As of right now, as I type this post, the DOW is up 400 points today. Doesn't cover yesterdays losses, or for the last year, but at least it didn't keep plummeting

 

but not this version. As it went to vote, and counting, Democratic and Republican leaders blamed each other. Pelosi said that Republican and Democratic leaders each pledged to deliver half their votes for the bill, but that Republicans fell short.

Ultimately, 60% of the chamber's Democrats supported the bill, but only 33% of Republicans did. That means that more than two-thirds of Republicans and 40 percent of Democrats opposed the bill.

"Democrats voted overwhelmingly for the bill. Republicans voted overwhelmingly against it," said Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and the Democrats' lead negotiator.

Another thing that many people tend to overlook is that all of the American House and half of the Senate is facing re-election in a few weeks, and it is understandable why they are wary of defying voters' anger. Especially when the moneys in this bill may be given to "fat cat" CEOs of failed systems in part, and this injustice was going to be paid for by this bill.

That maybe because of Section IV which addresses "No Windfalls For Executives", isn’t as "iron clad" as most outside of the group would like to see; "Executives who made bad decisions should not be allowed to dump their bad assets on the government, and then walk away with millions of dollars in bonuses. In order to participate in this program companies will lose some tax benefits and, in some cases must limit executive pay. In addition, the bill limits "golden parachutes" and requires that unearned bonuses be returned."

It is the ambiguous parts and "wiggle room" in that section which has so much of middle class America up in arms, and their representatives listening to them.

Eliminate the part where "Joe six-pack" and his taxes "might" end up paying for a golden parachute guarantee to failed corporate CEOs (who pay little if any tax on any income), and it might pass.

 

just the thought is depressing, I hate to think that thousands will probably loose their jobs because a few greedy idiots played with fire.

 

America what have you gotten yourselves into

 

Indeed brndirt, The abundance of conditional words (in just what you said) ... limits, some, bad, unearned, should, participate (what if they quit? Not getting away that easy) , might, failed ... all these words are open to individual interpretation, case by case ... in other words (= to) politically correct, non committal BS
Nancy Pelosi, thank you for turning our Congress into "Divorce Court". Two years after (the seperation), with control of both the Senate and the House, (custody), you still blame your "X" for everything in your life.
Take a mental health week. Go to a spa, put some cucumber slices over your eyes, and take a "Mud" (cement) bath ... ten feet deep. Say hi to "Jimmy Hoffa", you wont be missed.
Where are you in all this? Taking vacations, and accepting automatic raises (unless you vote against them)? What a "Tidy" law you managed to pass there.
I've heard the Democrats told both Nancy Pelosi & Barney Frank to STFU on Thursday, or be either keel-hauled or impaled.
Every time they open their mouths they confirm to the American people that they are more concerned with their parties control, (and getting re-elected), than the welfare of the American people & the world's economy.
Hot tip for the both of you ... if you got your entire party to vote with you ... you wouldn't need a single Republican vote.
Get rid of the "Pork", and be very, very specific in the wording, or you'll go down in history all right.
The days of your Same Old Sh_t are over. We know your "game". We're watching.
we means the world.

 

My agreement with you is a bit "qualified", but understood. The long standing quote; "The President (Executive) proposes, the Congress disposes" has to be remembered as well. It has been estimated that over 80% of all laws and other legislation passed and enacted by Congress, have originated in the Executive branch since 1933. If it is well thought out, makes sense, and doesn’t offend a majority of Americans, and their representatives, it has a better than good chance of passing.

The Executive of today is largely much like those which proceeded it, the President (and his administration) is expected to make detailed recommendations to Congress in the form of messages or proposed bills. We judge our Presidents on their ability to formulate and shepherd their proposals through Congress. That concept was written by Clinton Rossiter during the Eisenhower years fifty-two years ago, and to my mind holds true. (Rossiter, Clinton. The American Presidency Harcourt and Brace; 1956 p. 83)

To fail to propose and shepherd a well conceived, balanced and just bill through Congress successfully, shows not only a weakness in the Executive, but a disconnect from the public which the Congress more closely represents, especially in an election year when the entire House is up for re-election, and half of the Senate is as well. This bill (correctly or not) appears to be a "last minute" attempt to save the "fat cats" in the financial industry at the expense of "Joe Six pack" and using his taxes to do so.

Whether that is true or not, it was the way it was written and interpreted by the public that created a 4:1 ratio of negative email, letters, and phone to the members of Congress. If four out of five of your own constituents feel strong enough to express their opinion against a bill, a wise legislator listens if he/she wishes to come back next year.

Something must be done to keep the whole thing from falling in on itself and precipitating another global depression, rather than a simple recession contained to the Americas, but this bill wasn’t it and it is understandable why the Legislative member are wary of defying voters' anger. Especially when the moneys in this bill may appear to be given to "fat cat" Wall Street speculators, or even CEOs of failed systems in part.

True or not, it is the appearance and perception which sticks in the mind of "Joe Six-pack" as he looks at his smaller paycheck with higher FICA and withholding taxes cutting into his take home pay, and wondering if his job is going to be shipped out to other peoples willing to work for less than he.

I always remember this old quote as per politics and how to succeed in them, and it has always stuck with me; "..the world is governed more by appearances than realities, so that it is fully as necessary to seem to know something as to really know it" (Daniel Webster).

I was also struck by John Adams quote; "In my many years I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a Congress" Adams also wrote that; "A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures."

Like it or not, our forefathers had it right more often than not. Special interest's moneys aside (which is the cancer eating at the vitals of America), ignoring these foundations of representative, small "d" democracy, increase the likelihood of failing these noble precepts rather than supporting and extending them.

 

Agree.
I have no desire to bail out fat cats, or to take over bad loans where all the profit of them has already been taken. Those who deliberately bought above themselves, multiply bought in order to flip in an up market, need to take their lumps, as in any risky venture. Read the disclaimer.
If it wasn't for many others (not all, some deserve not to be bailed out from their greed), being destroyed financially, I'd say let them go down.
The innocent are being used as pawns (hidden behind), to force a last minute deal through, that is temporary at best.
As the Democratic Senator from Virginia (who was one of the first to speak against the language & immediacy), on CSPAN, a tourniquet on a severe wound, to save the life long enough to get to a hospital for intensive care.
It's total nerve to demand this money for a triage type "fix" (money) from all of us, that is neither the fault, nor did it enrich most of us.
With the situation so dire, anything but prison is too good for the controllers of these companies, and certainly no severance package of any type, to include the selling of all their ill-gotten assets to pay for their criminal acts.
Dodd knew six months before it happened that there was no stopping it, and others surely knew as well.
The question of why they waited until it was an emergency, is absolutely because they wanted to ram a "stinker" through, using "Fear" (now or else) & "guilt" (you'll be hurting innocent people).
They think we are so stupid that we can be herded like cattle. As I said, if it didn't hurt so many innocents, I'd say let them go down.
As it has to be, I want a guaranteed pay back with interest, and no parachutes, or immunity from prosecution, no matter to where it leads, or which party(s), or how high. If it takes a while it does. If it has to be shoved through, have them accept additional terms yet to be revealed. Turn about is fair play.
I like the Adams quotes.
I irks me no end to see or hear people who want to re-write the Constitution. It was drafted by folks wise beyond their years, who have seen all the types of treachery before.
A new day requires a new way? Phooey! In the way people act towards one another, I can't think of much that has changed since Cave Man. Not that I know what cave man did, apart from survive.

 

Shortly after it took office in 2001, the Bush administration issued a warning to Congress that mortgage lending was out of control and reforms needed to be made; Congress did nothing. Again, after the 2004 elections returned Bush to the White House, he made a series of speeches in which he warned that the mortgage debt was spiraling out of control and new regulations needed to be passed to safeguard the financial markets; Congress, now fully controlled by the Democrats, ignored the warning.

None of that is surprising since members of Congress receive a huge amount of their campaign contributions from banks, insurance companies and lending institutions and to reign in the free wheeling credit and lending industry with effective legislation would have meant a significant reduction in the money flowing into politician's pockets. Now, Nancy Pelosi has the gall to blame the debacle on Bush's "economic policies" when for the last four years she and her cohorts in Congress were in charge of approving those policies.

The problem is now far past the point where "Joe Six Pack", or the "taxpayer" can avoid paying for the mess. Either the financial markets get rescued with a massive infusion of cash which now can only come from the tax payer, or we let the "free market" punish those who screwed up by allowing the financial sector to crash. Either way, it's going to be damned painful for huge numbers of people in the general public who in no way contributed to the problem; the only question is, which alternative will be least painful in the end? There's no point in shooting ourselves in our collective foot simply in order to be able to punish the financial wrong-doers.

I can understand the general desire to strike back at those who reaped millions in "golden parachutes" after making really stupid decisions, but one has to remember we need very smart and knowledgable people to command the financial sector and these types are not going to participate if the rewards are not commensurate with the efforts involved. So in creating new regulations we need to be very careful to make sure that effective leadership is not penalized.

One thing that would be most effective in sending a message to our politicians in this matter, would be to vote every single incumbent in Congress out of office....no exceptions.