The President's Jobs Speech

BearMtnHIB wrote: homeagain- The first bailout was also wrong and should not have happened. It was a bullsh** lie that the economy was going to fall off the face of the earth.

Did you believe them at the time? I didn't. Do you think what they did was wrong? I do. They stabbed the American market system in the back, and comitted the worst offense- throwing out the most important rule of free markets with the bath water- moral hazard. They called it "too big to fail"- it was bullcrap!

Obama is doing the same thing- only amplified by 5 times. It was wrong to do it in the last few months of Bush's watch, and even more wrong to do more of it now.

Centrally managed economies have a long established record throughout history of failure- and the results are always miserable for those unfortunate citizens who get caught under it.

That's where we are now- near the edge of collapse.

What I think is this......the derivatives,toxic loans,cooked books...what phrase you wish to use had GLOBAL implications because of AIG's massive oversight of money. I believe that that factor (GLOBAL
collapse) scared the sh** out of Benny and his gang and I think the indebtness (read corp. contributions to Bush and gang) to their
supports was the impetus for the Tarp.....(the more research you do,the more you realize there was some funky finances that were
floating around for a VERY LONG TIME before the Tarp was implemented.) I DO think the world was holding it's breath and turning blue,because AIG is a world-wide player. Everything else was just collateral damage.

Sure the banks are better off- and why wouldn't they be? They got trillions of our money, it was the biggest highway robbery in world history.

The banks are doing just fine.

I don't give a rats ass about banks though- some would have survived to aquire the assets of those who mis-managed and failed.

I care about the people- I care about the millions of damaged lives and careers this is causing. We are not better off with these policies- we are worse off and still headed downhill and we can't see the bottom yet.

If we ever hit bottom- we will have trillions in debt to pay back! That's not exactly going to be a fresh start is it? We'd be better doing nothing at all.

BearMtnHIB wrote: Sure the banks are better off- and why wouldn't they be? They got trillions of our money, it was the biggest highway robbery in world history.

The banks are doing just fine.

I don't give a rats ass about banks though- some would have survived to aquire the assets of those who mis-managed and failed.

I care about the people- I care about the millions of damaged lives and careers this is causing. We are not better off with these policies- we are worse off and still headed downhill and we can't see the bottom yet.

If we ever hit bottom- we will have trillions in debt to pay back! That's not exactly going to be a fresh start is it? We'd be better doing nothing at all.

YES, I agree with you....MY point was that this fubar was on Bush's Watch for a VERY long time and it wasn't just the last several months of his tenure. The REAL PROBLEM is that we STILL have Geithner and Bernake orchestrating this thing.....
read my SIG LINE......"the problems we face will NOT be solved by the minds that created them." It's been my Sig line for a VERY long,long time..... :faint:

YES, I agree with you....MY point was that this fubar was on Bush's Watch for a VERY long time and it wasn't just the last several months of his tenure. The REAL PROBLEM is that we STILL have Geithner and Bernake orchestrating this thing.....
read my SIG LINE......"the problems we face will NOT be solved by the minds that created them." It's been my Sig line for a VERY long,long time.....

This we can agree on.

BearMtnHIB wrote: I've had to endure your left leaning hot air for far too long!

Talk about utopian fantasies!

Care to quote something I've said that qualifies as "hot air" or "utopian fantasies"?

AspenValley wrote: A case could be made that it would have been preferable to let the banksters go down without a bail out. But only in an utopian fantasy would have that have worked out as smoothly as you seem to think.

Particularly since a good portion of the "bank bailout", along with the $600 Billion pledged by the Fed in November of 2008, was to make good on the implicit federal guarantee associated with what Fannie, Freddie and the FHLB either sold or held. And then , to ice the cake, Christopher "Friend of Angelo" Dodd and Barney "Fannie and Freddie are Solid" Frank are the ones who wrote the new financial regulations. You really can't make this stuff up, can you AV.

BearMtnHIB wrote: Sure the banks are better off- and why wouldn't they be? They got trillions of our money, it was the biggest highway robbery in world history.

Please explain how banks paying back the loans, qualifies as the "biggest highway robbery in world history"?