US bail-out – everybody happy?

It would seem not – least of all Republican Marcy Kaptur, who is refusing to vote for the proposed bail-out plan of $700 billion to right the allegedly-crippled US economy, citing that indebting the public taxpayer whilst ingoring the alleged crimes of those on Wall Street whose greed and corruption have caused the problem in the first place is just plain wrong.

Seems like a fair point to me…full video after the jump (Facebook readers – you’ll have to click here for the full video).

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Advertisements

6 Comments

  1. TooT
    Posted September 30, 2008 at 6:52 pm | Permalink | Reply

    That 700 billion should have gone to every American adult…why?
    Because it would flow right back into the economy, we would pay back our own debts/loans…

    Wall Street should have been up on their game…

    When was the last time Americans were bailed out of their financial credit woes…ooooooooooooooohhhhhh the “STIMULUS” package….riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight!

    giving our money back to us wouldve given every adult American approx. $200,000 and American families $500,000…God Bless America!!!

  2. mart
    Posted October 1, 2008 at 9:51 am | Permalink | Reply

    If I (or anybody else) put all my money into bad investments or lent to marginally safe debtors, then lost it due to my own bad judgement, I wouldn’t get bailed out – I’d be left to suffer the consequences of my mistakes… why should the banks not have to pay for their actions?

    Although letting them go bust would certainly affect more then just the banks, I can’t help feeling that bailing them out would be for the worse in the long term… Dubya’s scaremongering address just didn’t convince…

  3. Posted October 1, 2008 at 6:07 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Whichever way you look at it, John Q Taxpayer is fucked right up the ass everywhichway.

    For those still sitting on the fence, I explain the Bill this way:

    Dave: “Hey, Bob, can I borrow $1000 from you? I have some things I need to pay.”

    Bob: “Sure my friend, here you go.”

    Two days later:

    Dave: “Hey Bob, I lost that $1000 at the craps table and wound up owing that much to someone else. Now there is a guy threatening to break my kneecaps unless I pay him today. Can I borrow another $1000 to pay him and avoid a beating?”

    Bob: “Sure my fr — hey, wait a minute here…”

    Simple.

    Rest assured, the bill will be approved by the Senate. If it gets rejected again by Congress, well, you’re still screwed because Bush just raises an Executive Order that overrides Congress. And then not only are you still being screwed, you have a President who acts above Congress and the will of the people. That, my Colonial cousins, is the act of a dictator. Welcome to the New World Order.

  4. speedmeisterp
    Posted October 2, 2008 at 12:28 am | Permalink | Reply

    Paulson and Bush are terrorists, playing on peoples fears. The stock market came back up. You know what they are planning now? Extra tax breaks for the rich bankers. In order to get the bill through they are adding more tax benefits for these people that have mulitple mansions and millions of dollars, so that they can give them 700 billion dollars. Its a sad day. And what about the timing? Paulson said a year or so ago that he thought banks were stronger than he’d ever seen in his career. Paulson has 700 million in personal assets and was the CEO of bank Goldman Sachs. Imagine that, a banker saying we need to give money to banks. I think there is a huge conflict of interest there. And what about timing? Why did Bush and Paulson have to propose this 6 weeks before the election? Think maybe he saw his last chance at ripping off taxpayers? Think he wanted to confuse voters right before the election and hope to steal some votes from it? And think about this, Bush says if we don’t give the banks money, we’ll have less credit available? What? If people believe this, I can fix the economy. Just send me cash, and I’ll loan it back to everyone and charge interest. Also, isn’t too much credit the problem anyway? Economists say even if we pass no bailout we will still have loans if you have decent credit. Its all a big scam.

  5. speedmeisterp
    Posted October 2, 2008 at 10:37 pm | Permalink | Reply

    After thinking about this more, it seems the real problems are that there aren’t many jobs, and people that do have jobs aren’t getting raises like they did 15 years ago. So my question is this – does it really matter who owns the loans, when the person thats been downsized works at Taco Bell and can’t make their payments?

  6. Posted October 2, 2008 at 11:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

    You make a valid point speedmeister but for one thing. What you say makes sense: to someone on minimum wage, it doesn’t really matter WHO they are supposed to be paying off. But remember that if Wall Street gets the $700 billion, where does it come from? How is it paid back? They won’t just pluck the cash from their collective asses.

    They’ll take it from you, the taxpayer, and should the boost prove temporary – after all you can’t expect the Wall Street fat-cats to change their ways – they’ll suddenly find that, oh surprise, Wall Street can’t pay it back as planned. Then they’ll raise your taxes. Which will only make those who are struggling already struggle even more.

    Those who are addicted to ridiculous profit – those who caused the problem in the first place – will never change. They won’t abandon overblown bonuses that reward temporary successes, because that’s like the Pope becoming a Scientologist. And I doubt there’ll be any legislation to stop it either – that would risk the money-seekers going elsewhere – they’ll go wherever CAN give them stupid silly money.

    And it puts into context all the campaign promises by both parties. The plan seems to be to close tax loopholes and tax breaks to the richest of the rich, and the largest corporations. And, at the same time, they want to generate more jobs by bringing companies back home from abroad with tempting financial packages. Is it just me that sees a problem with that? How do you tempt companies back to the US with higher taxes? And if you don’t tempt them back, how do you generate all these new jobs?

    It’s all horsefeathers. I have no solution to the problems, I simply feel sorry for the average taxpaying, hard-working Americans that both candidates go on about so much. There’s no break, there’s no out, and whichever way you look at it, there are hard times ahead. And no matter what, barring some miracle, the rich will get richer, the poor poorer.

    You have to give Dubya credit for taking Clinton’s massive budget surplus and turning it into a crippling deficit in only eight years. The man is a true shining beacon to idiots everywhere. Yay.

Post a Comment

Required fields are marked *

*
*

%d bloggers like this: