Gothamist: House Rejects Bailout Plan, Dow Drops 777 Points

big cash cow

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 01:41:19 -0500

This has all been predicted in Harry S. Dent, Jr.'s book The Roaring 2000's. Just like the roaring 20's, depression is right around the corner...he said around 2010. Not because of the mortgage industry faltering...that may just speed things up a bit. But because of population cycles and an 80 year market cycle. Check it out for yourself.

Reflect

Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:41:01 -0500

Let em sink. New ways of doing things will come about. Everything is not all about money. Dont forget thant getting involved in a protest is a good follow up to leaving a comment. Get involved write congres, and dont let them fool you into thinking the bailout will help. Those are the same people that need to understand if you dont have the money you dont get to buy it.

Pull My Finger

Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:29:17 -0500

Anything coming fronm that jerkoff should be vetoed. Go back to 2004 when that ass praised the theiving bastards that were stealing money hand over fist and he said there was no problem. It is the DEMCRAP CYA PLAN.

yg

Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:36:42 -0500

Without looking too long (about 2 minutes on google), here's one: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1427 And the roll-call: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2007-396 Notice a little "R" next to every Nay vote. If I would have been like your mini-Goebbels on the radio, I would have went to cspan and requested every nay-voting republican's comments about this bill. Fortunately I'm not.

Pull My Finger

Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:26:52 -0500

yg please go ahead enlighten us

NannyState

Tue, 30 Sep 2008 06:38:47 -0500

Cash economy now. What's the color of your money?

slappy

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 22:34:29 -0500

Let it fall. We will all be better off in the ways that really count. I for one don't live on credit. Maybe people will face each other in a different way if they are not focused on what they can BUY all the time. Greed is greed. Let it end. We will all be alright. Elect leaders who have ideas about real social and economic change. Enough already with these greedy bastards.

throwcomputer

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 21:51:10 -0500

http://www.mousesafari.com/2008/09/29/pfffft/

yg

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 21:36:16 -0500

Pull My Finger, Limbaugh is America's Goebbels. You think I can't make a montage of republicans protesting regulations of the agencies? stop listening to neocon propaganda.

tingo

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 21:05:27 -0500

Unfortunately, this all comes down to US citizens not trusting their leaders. For right or wrong, they cried wolf too many times. The vast majority believes the wealthy congress and the president only have their own and corporate America's interests in mind. And it's all finally come to a head. So the general consensus among the US public, for right or for wrong, is: screw em all. And our leaders are too far up their own rears to not play politics. So God help us all.

longacre

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 21:04:58 -0500

Sweden's been through this before.... Sweden's GDP of $455 billion is approximately equal to that of the state of Ohio, or about half that of New York state.

Pull My Finger

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:23:49 -0500

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs&eurl=http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.member.html[/url] Proof of the guilt of the leftist scum destroying this country

Spiritof76

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:24:50 -0500

I hope someone in the Democratic Party has the balls to challenge Pelosi for leadership either now or in January. You don't bring a bill to the floor unless you have the votes. Actually, they had the votes. But now the Republicans are blaming a speech on the floor by Pelosi where she raked Bush over the coals for the situation. Apparently a number of Republicans found it offensive and decided to take petty revenge by voting against it instead.

thefacts

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:57:51 -0500

You eat "pease porridge", not "pease and porridge". Hot or cold, as you like.

The Edge

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:55:35 -0500

It's a good thing all some of you can do is bitch and whine.

NannyState

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:42:08 -0500

Fortis collapsed, a $1 trillion bank in Europe. Wachovia, a $500 billion bank, sank and was snapped up by Citi, which itself is weak. China will not buy treasuries like they once did and bless their little hearts, Dubai, Qatar, et al, are placing their bets elsewhere. (Wall St. people have been advising them for years) At the end of the day, we just watch the Republican idiots get dumber and dumber as their money gets smaller and smaller: "W shor' do know 'bout th' economy, he jes made $50 billin' from a $14 trillin' GDP!"

Toby von Meistersinger

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:33:48 -0500

It looks like the smart thing to do is to not vote for any incumbents in November. Not that that will help, since those who run for office probably shouldn't be running in the first place.

Amanda Harlech

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:22:51 -0500

ans in wall street, in the form of REGULATION. To get the 700 Billion then wallstreet was to be accountable: that’s the deal. But Republicans voted agains BEACAUSE THEY CAN NOT DEAL WITH REGULATIONS ON GREED. . . . . . . . .

gotyankees

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:06:05 -0500

yeah sure...blame the Democrats. 60% of them voted for the bailout and less than 40% of Republicans voted for it...so WHO failed to pass the bill...The whole Republican regime of Bush, Cheney, McCain and thier devil signs...will live fat into the future as the rest of America suffers by what they caused...

JacqueMehoff

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:42:14 -0500

it's the american dream but you'd have to be asleep to believe it. thank you george carlin.

gotyankees

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:40:05 -0500

just in case you haven't been paying attention to the CEO's and their $$$ during and leading up to this crisis...check out some of these payouts (including take home pay, bonuses and stocks) to these 10 CEO's to the tune of $836.7 Million...or over 10% of what the government is initially expected to save us from financial ruin... Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo $361,700,000 Fannie Mae CEO Daniel Mudd $11,600,000 Freddie Mac CEO Richard Syron $12,900,000 Bear Stearns CEO James Cayne $42,300,000 Lehman Bros. Richard Fuld $156,500,000 AIG CEO Martin Sullivan $25,400,000 Merrill Lynch CEO Stan O'Neal $66,000,000 WAMU CEO Kerry Killinger $36,000,000 Wachovia CEO G. Kennedy Thompson $16,000,000 Citigroup CEO Charles Prince $57,000,000 ...and you know this is only the tip of the iceberg in terms of who made money...10 CEO's out of many, many more...and let's just assume it at least twice that with the shit we don't know about...so let's say these 10 CEO's are good for at least 20% of the money that WE THE PEOPLE are expected to pony up so they can keep living the good life...Hovoervilles is right...

babyhitler

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:36:23 -0500

this whole bailout thing is just telling america, "hey, rich and powerful corrupt people run america, I know you don't like to save them, but too bad! you have to or your children will starve"

JenChungsBra

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:32:10 -0500

BTW, can I say that our so-called leaders are pretty fucking stupid to say that the bailout plan is "needed" to prevent widespread financial collapse, ESPECIALLY BEFORE THE VOTES ARE COUNTED! The whole fucking system is based on confidence. If you say that something is needed to avoid disaster and then it fails to materialize then of course there's going to a be a disaster. The morons in Washington totally lost their cool and now it's trickling down to the markets. Idiots.

EastRiver

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:30:25 -0500

I have an idea, was doesn't the government seize the assets of the oil companies to help alleviate this mess. Yes, let's seize up the economy even further. I hope people will soon wake up to the face that the major oil companies have been steadily losing power as more and more oil is under the control of state owned companies.

JenChungsBra

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:26:05 -0500

Imported is expensive because of the value of the dollar. But home grown prices will drop, even with the increased energy costs of running those grow lights 18 hours a day. I don't know about you skiers though.

Buck Owens

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:22:58 -0500

I have an idea, was doesn't the government seize the assets of the oil companies to help alleviate this mess.

edEx

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:22:15 -0500

We can all thank the GOP for their diligent effort in destroying our nation the last 8 years... Thanks you Ralph Nader.

Jen S

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:14:49 -0500

Finally, a reason to be glad I'm broke! Good luck, people with savings and property.

Kojak

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:05:50 -0500

"even drugs are expensive now! How will people cope? " In the past few months I've had dealers come out at me asking to buy coke, weed, etc out in broad daylight sometimes. Well wall street hurts, our coke dealers hurt too

bagelman

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:00:37 -0500

i never thought i'd watch cnbc. anybody see rick santelli ranting in chicago? that guy is nuts. in a good way.

babyhitler

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:59:02 -0500

even drugs are expensive now! How will people cope? I don't see anyone hurling themselves out of windows like the 80's.

robingee

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:51:49 -0500

Someone's going to have at it with PhotoShop and that picture.

shinyshiny

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:50:31 -0500

I think we should all just trust in the power of bat boy... Henry Paulson has called on Bat Boy to persuade those in the House of Representatives who rejected it to move the plan forward. Bat Boy seemed confident that a bounty of mosquitoes and his collection of bird skulls will do the trick.

drewo

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:47:07 -0500

As far as Fanny/Freddie "[diverting] money to people who wouldn't have qualified for mortgages in a real private market", these entities purchase mortgages from private institutions, they do not issue them directly. And they know they have a buyer of these loans in (government-backed) Fanny and Freddie. Without that guarantee, they don't make the loans, or they suffer the consequences of a bad business decision - but they suffer without government assistance. From Lewrockwell.com: They were created by FDR in 1938 to fund mortgages insured by the Federal Home Administration. They were used by every president as a means to achieve this peculiar American value that every last person must own a home, no matter what. So they were given the legal permission to purchase private mortgages and make them part of their portfolios. Still later, under LBJ and Nixon, they became public companies and sold stock. People called this privatization, but that isn't quite right. They had access to a guaranteed line of credit creation with the U.S. Treasury. They had lower borrowing costs than any private-sector equivalent. Government-sponsored enterprises are not subject to market discipline like regular private sector companies. Their securities are listed as government securities, so their risk premiums were not dictated by the free market. They could leverage themselves at 50-, 75-, 100-1, pyramiding debt on a tiny foundation of equity. The financial markets have long believed that the GSEs would be bailed out no matter what. And so this put them in a completely different position from a company like Enron, which the markets watched closely. What's causing the current panic is that the markets have wised up and started evaluating these institutions by market standards. Freddie and Fannie have collapsing market prices, and their bonds are carrying ever-higher risk premiums.

Bottomless Chips

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:09:22 -0500

Botomless Chip (#57), I understand what you mean there, and agree that it was an unwise policy and has contributed to this problem, but the major contributor was the lack of transparency of these securities, something that was not forced on anyone. If there had been more transparency, those securities would most likely have been valued more appropriately, and treated with much more scepticism. Agreed. Again, I just think the root cause is being missed. No doubt that everything you said is true--those assets generally do not appear on balance sheets--but I just think we're missing the cause. And we're going to repeat our mistakes if we don't address the root cause as opposed to some of the more cosmetic, but politically appealing, changes that can be made.

Future Taliban

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:09:04 -0500

People of USA to Wall Street: DROP DEAD MUTHFVCKERS

AnonPoster

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:05:53 -0500

Drewyo (#46), the CRA is a red herring; while it does prevent excluding those who fall into higher-risk categories from having access to credit, it does not force banks to issue loans outside of the scope of affordability, or to inherently unqualified individuals, and furthermore, "...it is hard to blame CRA for the mortgage meltdown when CRA doesn't even apply to most of the loans that are behind it. As the University of Michigan's Michael Barr points out, half of sub-prime loans came from those mortgage companies beyond the reach of CRA. A further 25 to 30 percent came from bank subsidiaries and affiliates, which come under CRA to varying degrees but not as fully as banks themselves. (With affiliates, banks can choose whether to count the loans.) Perhaps one in four sub-prime loans were made by the institutions fully governed by CRA" - Robert Gordon, Economist at the New American Foundation As far as Fanny/Freddie "[diverting] money to people who wouldn't have qualified for mortgages in a real private market", these entities purchase mortgages from private institutions, they do not issue them directly. Botomless Chip (#57), I understand what you mean there, and agree that it was an unwise policy and has contributed to this problem, but the major contributor was the lack of transparency of these securities, something that was not forced on anyone. If there had been more transparency, those securities would most likely have been valued more appropriately, and treated with much more scepticism.

TK

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:05:30 -0500

No doubt that quality businesses will still have access to bank loans. Everywhere knows that lines of credit have been flying around b/c of the historical low rate of interest rates (thx be to Greenspan) and the depreciated dollar (thx be to Greenspan/Bernake). Did people care about not meeting payroll during the internet bubble? No, because their employees worked without pay for time under the belief there were stock option payouts in the future. Well guess what happens at the end of the real estate bubble?

Teddie Boy Eddie

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:59:04 -0500

Thanks, Jen. Exactly. Businesses need to rely on lines of credit. This has nothing to do with being irresponsible and is not comparable to people who rack up credit card debt.

Bottomless Chips

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:51:57 -0500

And the tech bubble was helped along by the Fed cutting interest rates in 1998 - when the economy was barely slowing down. Exactly. As long as the Fed, and not the market, establish the Federal Funds rates we'll have these booms and busts.

Bottomless Chips

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:48:55 -0500

Bottomless Chips, what was the government intervention that caused this? Was the government forcing banks to give excessive variable-rate loans to high-risk borrowers? Was the government packaging those dodgy loans into securities and then distributing them throughout the financial system without any transparency? Seems to me if the government had stepped in and stopped the reckless lending in the first place, our houses would have been worth a bit less in the long run, but the financial system would have been better off. Okay, I'm not condoning such practices. But you have to realize that people are always going to work in their biggest self-interest: greed. You cannot regulate this as there will always be loopholes. And usually the more you regulate, you more loopholes and injustices you create. But what you can do here is limit the tools to speculate. You do that through the money supply. When you inflate the money, you allow for the recklessness and malinvestments that inevitably come about. So the amount of people it affects is greater than if you had an honest monetary policy. And now we're compounding the problem. Failure is a good thing. But it should be limited to those who took the risks. And when you inflate the currency and then socialize the losses you're affecting everyone.

Felix Hoenikker

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:48:48 -0500

Bailout + baby boomer entitlement burden will be the final swirl as the country goes down the terr-let. Tell your kids to learn Mandarin, Hindi, Russian or Arabic.

Felix Hoenikker

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:46:23 -0500

Back to 18% mortgage rates from the early 80's.

Jen Chung

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:44:47 -0500

Re: businesses using lines of credit--the unfortunate thing is that many responsible businesses do rely on lines of credit...even though to ask their clients to pay within 30 days, sometimes they don't get paid for months and need the credit for float a month or two.

EastRiver

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:44:47 -0500

real root cause of this bubble is the Federal Reserve and the absurdly low interest rates in 2001 and 2002 to stave off a recession from the NASDAQ bubble. And the tech bubble was helped along by the Fed cutting interest rates in 1998 - when the economy was barely slowing down. If you look back through the history of the twentieth century the average economic expansion only lasted about five years. You have to wonder if Clinton would be regarded as a genius if the economy had been allowed to slow naturally in 1998. And hey look! The Dow's rebounding to only down 580!

yg

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:44:22 -0500

Teddie Boy Eddie, I don't agree. If a business would be in need of a service, someone would step up and provide it, granted there's money to be made. Take a big business in need of a loan. Let's say Microsoft. Their business might be slowing down, but no way they are failing. They are financially secure. Do you really think no one will provide them with a loan? May be the interest rate would be a little higher, that's all. The 700 BILLION dollars of our money on the other hand will flow down to a) Banks who made bad loans. b) People who took out loans they can't repay. I say a) deserve to fail; and b) won't get to live in their McMansions, some people, you know, rent.

UnrepentantFenian

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:42:17 -0500

Times like these call for hard liquor and big glasses.

Bottomless Chips

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:40:18 -0500

@39 and @42. It's a little of what #46 said, but the real root cause of this bubble is the Federal Reserve and the absurdly low interest rates in 2001 and 2002 to stave off a recession from the NASDAQ bubble. The excess liquidity allowed for ARMs and risky practices. We would not have all these banks with illiquid assets (mortgage backed securities) if we didn't the easy monetary policy from the Fed. The Fed was irresponsible with our money supply and you can't print money without malinvestments and bubbles. We're seeing that right now, and if we print $700bn more we'll see a new bubble in another 5 years or so.

TK

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:39:07 -0500

Teddie - frankly, if a business need loans to pay its day-to-day bills that business is in trouble whether or not the bill passes. Just like those families using credit cards to finance lifestyles they really couldn't afford, eventually the line of credit dries up and you pay the piper.

EastRiver

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:38:33 -0500

And yet I don't think the rent of my apt is going to be lower... sigh... I don't know when your lease is up but I would play hardball with your landlord. Demand is sure to fall and landlords would rather keep a tenant than put a unit on the market under these conditions. Research your neighborhood and check Craigslist for sublets. I've seen a few ads with people trying to sublet below their current lease rate.

throwcomputer

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:34:49 -0500

rather everything tank than pay for fucking arrogance! now if they only lined them up and let us kick them in the balls while they're down!

NYCSniper

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:32:51 -0500

@Shinobi Shaw: Why the date Oct. 10th?

Teddie Boy Eddie

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:31:34 -0500

yq, I think you're wrong. Many qualified people won't be able to get loans. But individual loans is not the real problem here. It's the very real possibility that businesses will not be able to get the kinds of credit they need to operate on a daily business, which means lots of people losing their jobs. That's in addition to retirement funds being hit hard. While this bailout sucks, the potential consequences could be much more severe for everyone, not just the rich, greedy d-bags who got us here.

NYCSniper

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:30:25 -0500

Those with the "blame bush, it's the neocons" mentality are so obviously ill-informed. It's a shame they actually get to vote with such a clear misunderstanding of the situation.

NYCSniper

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:29:03 -0500

#46 explains it spot on

Outter Burrougher

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:29:00 -0500

"I'd take those consequences, get our monetary policy fixed, and get back to a true free-market with no government intervention---which caused this in the first place." I thought there had been DE-regulation in the past fifteen years?

mocanlagunas

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:27:19 -0500

And yet I don't think the rent of my apt is going to be lower... sigh...

AnonPoster

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:23:44 -0500

Are you at all interested in how the 94 Democrats that voted NO are going to say to their constituents? EastRiver, very fair point. Those who voted "no" on either side because they couldn't figure out how to explain this to their constituents should be condemned. Lack of political courage in the face of impending disaster is unforgivable.

drewo

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:23:10 -0500

#39 David - one example, from an opinion piece in last week's NY Sun (to be missed): At the Division of Labour Web log, an economist, Lawrence White, asks: "What deregulation have we had in the last decade? Please tell me. On the contrary, we've had a strengthening of the Community Reinvestment Act, which has encouraged banks to make mortgage loans to borrowers who previously would have been rejected ... " The government-backed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were created precisely to interfere with the housing and mortgage markets. In effect, Freddie and Fannie diverted money to people who wouldn't have qualified for mortgages in a real private market. Had actual private companies performed these activities, they would have been subject to market checks. But they were not. The results were predictable. Now that it's all tumbling down, the politicians and pundits blame the free market.

fakenewyorker

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:22:46 -0500

dow will go below 10k by tomorrow morning. we are witnessing history folks.

yg

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:18:01 -0500

AnonPoster, Of course people will be able to get loans, they would just need to be... how do you say... QUALIFIED! So it would be a little more expensive. Good! Sellers still need to sell, so they would be forced to drop their price. Real estate is overpriced anyway. And this bill is not socialist, where govt provides social services and financial help to people. This is more like communism or fascism, where govt controls commerce.

babyhitler

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:17:39 -0500

let the republican base feel the scourge of the republican heads. The republican constituency is gonna feel the depression more than anybody else. they can turn to jesus and ask him to turn oxycontin into bread.

AnonPoster

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:15:48 -0500

sidenote

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:14:24 -0500

What a disaster. People like #33, I'd urge you to read up on this plan a bit more - all business won't fail, but I think this crisis is a bit worse than you seem to think. Not passing this bill will impose severe punishment to regular citizens who didn't do anything wrong. And it's not like they won't be able to buy that vacation house, they'll be fired because their workplace can't meet payroll, they'll lose their house, they'll see their life savings destroyed. We are inches away from the Great Depression Pt. 2 - it's not just going to be OK to do nothing.

famdoc

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:14:01 -0500

Police are erecting barricades on Wall St. and Broadway right now. Do they expect trouble?

David McCaffredy

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:13:22 -0500

"I'd take those consequences, get our monetary policy fixed, and get back to a true free-market with no government intervention---which caused this in the first place." OK... I'll bite. How did government intervention get us in this mess in the first place?

tingo

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:12:43 -0500

Pure politics. It's all going along with the GOP plan - have McCain 'swoop' into broker a deal. Do they really think we're such idiots? This is a scandal of EPIC proportions and I think, at the very least, the Supreme Court needs to get involved. I don't know about you, but I'm have severe crisis of confidence in all of our 'leaders.'

contro

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:12:12 -0500

My butt hole survives!

EastRiver

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:06:01 -0500

I can't wait to see how these conservative GOP'ers plan to explain to their middle-America constituents why doing nothing was the right move Are you at all interested in how the 94 Democrats that voted NO are going to say to their constituents? And of course Pelosi is on TV blaming Bush for the failure of the vote.

Shinobi Shaw

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:03:55 -0500

#30 because he is referencing his master? And wait between tomorrow and Oct. 10th, it's only going to get worse.

Bottomless Chips

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:00:57 -0500

Nobody will be able to get loans, nobody will be able to sell their houses, retirement funds will drop like stones, construction and investment in NYC will stagnate and unemployment will jump above 15%. . . but at least we won't be "socialist". I can't wait to see how these conservative GOP'ers plan to explain to their middle-America constituents why doing nothing was the right move while we spend the next 4 years digging ourselves our of a collapsed economy. The idea is that with this bill, we'd have worse consequences than you posit in your first paragraph 5-10 years from now. So what you said doesn't really sound so bad. I'd take those consequences, get our monetary policy fixed, and get back to a true free-market with no government intervention---which caused this in the first place.

drewo

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:00:03 -0500

Can't spend money we don't have. Although our government has been doing that for years. Maybe it's time to stop. And business will find a way to continue doing business. There just won't be as much easy money.

bsalamon

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:55:46 -0500

"...always look on the bright side of death"

NYCSniper

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:55:34 -0500

I love how you nitwits are blaming the repubs when the Dems have the majoirity in both houses and therefore could theoretically pass the bill on their own WITHOUT ANY REPUBLICANS! Of course, they're too chickenshit to put just their necks on the line over this one. Not to mention the bailout amounts to giving more matches to the very arsonists who have burned the house down. (Yes, YOU Mr. Frank)

just_saying

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:54:29 -0500

Why is Bush making the devil's horns gesture with his hand?

plk779

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:53:12 -0500

Time to invest in liquor!

zodak

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:51:00 -0500

"Good luck everyone, hope you've got all your money in gold bars like #1." my money is in latinum.

JacqueMehoff

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:50:45 -0500

don't need gold, that's another fallacy. if that's the case all those rappers are gazillionaires. Let the market destroy itself and fix itself. maybe this will finally get middle Americans to see what their government is doing.

AnonPoster

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:47:20 -0500

sidenote

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:44:38 -0500

I'm w/ you Matty, people on this site have no idea how serious this is. Partisan bickering is going to destroy the market and the nest eggs of most middle Americans. Good luck everyone, hope you've got all your money in gold bars like #1.

TK

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:44:34 -0500

Finally a win for the American people. This bill would have become the PATRIOT Act for our finanical industry. Fuck congress and their we're smarter than you and we know what's good for you attitudes.

EastRiver

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:44:23 -0500

I hope someone in the Democratic Party has the balls to challenge Pelosi for leadership either now or in January. You don't bring a bill to the floor unless you have the votes.

Rob T Firefly

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:41:50 -0500

Note to self: steal a letter opener from my cubicle, with which to defend myself on the commute home.

zodak

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:39:31 -0500

ron paul!!

edEx

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:37:51 -0500

thanks GOP for getting us here... thanks o much!

JacqueMehoff

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:36:03 -0500

I see you're one of them. permission to cum aboard captain.

Think twice

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:32:44 -0500

Republicans once again saving us from socialism. Fuckers.

JacqueMehoff

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:31:53 -0500

but I love Amerika!

matty

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:31:38 -0500

"oh woe is me, no second yacht this year." Your ignorance is kind of amazing.

JacqueMehoff

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:30:06 -0500

here comes the "it's going to hurt all of us" comments. sure it will but I'm used to it and I'm not complaining. never had I complained. oh woe is me, no second yacht this year.

blablanyc

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:30:06 -0500

TJ, you are correct about foreign concerns purchasing private US assets and companies. The bail out was to prevent foreign companies from taking over Amerika.

bsalamon

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:28:11 -0500

bi-partisan at its best

Steven

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:27:42 -0500

Yay for Republicans!

TJ

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:27:32 -0500

Don't worry Dubai will just buy us. Everyone. Everything.

gossipgirl

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:27:17 -0500

This is better for the long run, it truly truly is.

djwerdna

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:26:31 -0500

re: the Dealbreaker comment suggesting it's the GOP's fault " The measure needs 218 votes for passage. Democrats voted 141 to 94 in favor of the plan, while Republicans voted 65 to 133 against. That left the measure with 206 votes for and 227 against." http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/29/news/economy/bailout/index.htm?cnn=yes

citizenerased

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:25:40 -0500

Fuck

PathToWisdom

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:24:49 -0500

We're all going to be eating peas and porridge. That's 1 way to lose weight and reduce you medical bills.

djwerdna

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:24:38 -0500

Everything is going to be OK.

bsalamon

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:24:12 -0500

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/23/business/worldbusiness/23krona.html?ex=1380254400&en=a70a39e48f33b9d5&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink Sweden's been through this before....

west side Michael

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:23:47 -0500

Yes,that Japanese artist that just built his treehouses in Madison Square park. Hello! I'm moving in.Can't make the rent Thanks Mr. President who could not get his own party behind him on this quasi-loan.

Bubba

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:23:45 -0500

Why doesn't Wall Street bail out Wall Street????

matty

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:22:55 -0500

This bailout was the last thing to prevent total economic collapse. I am very worried...

thenamesdave

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:21:31 -0500

Thank god for those gold bars I keep in my freezer. Hoovervilles, here we come! This is what everyone gets for thinking they know what "socialism" is.