Ok, I found and read the "bail out bill, this is what I see (suspect, Obama)

[paperhouse]

Originally Posted by ohioaninsc

One of my problems with the whole situation is if this bill was supposedly that important, then why not cut that amount of spending out of other gov't programs, so as to not continue to balloon the National Debt. One part of that bill says they will raise the debt ceiling to $11.3 Trillion. That is unacceptable. Cut out the other spending, and then pass this. Our military spends more money than all other militaries worldwide. Cut out some of these bloated contracts. End all gov't earmarks. Cut the spending on Welfare. Don't just issue more debt, which will lead to more inflation.

Section 122. Increase in the Statutory Limit on the Public Debt.
Raises the debt ceiling from $10 trillion to $11.3 trillion.

That would mean we are using 1.3 TRILLION dollars, about twice $700 Billion, right? What gives?

From the full text of the defeated bill:

40
O:\AYO\AYO08C04.xml
1 SEC. 115. GRADUATED AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE.
2 (a) AUTHORITY.-The authority of the Secretary to
3 purchase troubled assets under this Act shall be limited
4 as follows:
5 (1) Effective upon the date of enactment of this
6 Act, such authority shall be limited to
7 $250,000,000,000 outstanding at any one time.

It's a smash and grab. And don't tell me it's not. There is no real limit to the amount they can take other than the debt ceiling. It also gives Paulson and Bernanke total authority while removing any oversight written into the bill or other laws.

Section 135. Preservation of Authority.
Clarifies that nothing in this Act shall limit the authority of the Secretary or the Federal Reserve under any other provision of law.

Basically, Paulson got his original plan with some pages stapled to the back of it. They talk about oversight, yet remove the authority of anyone to question what he's done. Nice.

[geeoro]

The failing companies should go into liquidation (Ch.7) The assets can then be sold gringing money into the system. The Toxic Debt. (Mortgages) can be renegotiated for a period so that homeowners can continue to keep their homes at a reduced payment with extended time or partial ownership with the Govt. ubtil they can buy their Govt. portion back. The Liquidation of the failing companies would cut out the rot and allow the Govt. to take on the Toxic debt, without paying for it. Other big Succesful finance houses could buy into the failing companies or buy the assets from the Govt. These options are already in place and do not need any new bills to implement them. Transparancy must be a important part of banking and no more golden parachutes. These people are already payed huge sums of money to do their job. Why should they be given extra just because they do a job that they are already getting big salaries for? Liquidity would occur and no money payed by the tax payer. FBI should also prosecute anyone who has committed an offence in these corrupt companies.

[paperhouse]

Originally Posted by geeoro

The failing companies should go into liquidation (Ch.7) The assets can then be sold gringing money into the system. The Toxic Debt. (Mortgages) can be renegotiated for a period so that homeowners can continue to keep their homes at a reduced payment with extended time or partial ownership with the Govt. ubtil they can buy their Govt. portion back. The Liquidation of the failing companies would cut out the rot and allow the Govt. to take on the Toxic debt, without paying for it. Other big Succesful finance houses could buy into the failing companies or buy the assets from the Govt. These options are already in place and do not need any new bills to implement them. Transparancy must be a important part of banking and no more golden parachutes. These people are already payed huge sums of money to do their job. Why should they be given extra just because they do a job that they are already getting big salaries for? Liquidity would occur and no money payed by the tax payer. FBI should also prosecute anyone who has committed an offence in these corrupt companies.

That's too simple.

Here's what they want instead.

"(e) PREVENTING UNJUST ENRICHMENT
-In making purchases under the authority of this Act, the Secretary shall take such steps as may be necessary to prevent un-just enrichment of financial institutions participating in a program established under this section, including by preventing the resale of a troubled asset to the Secretary at a higher price than what the seller paid to purchase the asset. This subsection does not apply to troubled assets acquired in a merger or acquisition, or a purchase of assets from a financial institution in conservatorship or receivership, or that has initiated bankruptcy proceedings under title 11, United States Code."

So they prevent companies from selling revalued assets to each other for profit, yet companies that buy into the bailout are allowed to resale their assets and charge the taxpayer for the total amount of the asset before it was revalued. If they purchased a $500k mortgage at $200k, they can receive the original amount from the Treasury of $500k while investing nothing and receiving all the profits should the foreclosed property be resold.

[paperhouse]

Originally Posted by KarlaT2

I agree. They keep calling it the "bailout plan", which causes negative feelings by most people. If they'd call it the "economic recovery plan" it doesn't sound so bad. Most people wouldn't think it's just a bail out for a bunch of rich CEO's.

It's not a recovery plan. Creating more money with no reserves doesn't recover anything. It's robbery in broad daylight.

[paperhouse]

And then there is this little gem. Jesus.

Section 115. Graduated Authorization to Purchase.
Authorizes the full $700 billion as requested by the Treasury Secretary for implementation of TARP. Allows the Secretary to immediately use up to $250 billion in authority under this Act. Upon a Presidential certification of need, the Secretary may access an additional $100 billion. The final $350 billion may be accessed if the President transmits a written report to Congress requesting such authority. The Secretary may use this additional authority unless within 15 days Congress passes a joint resolution of disapproval which may be considered on an expedited basis.

If Congress passes this, they have 15 days to stop the President from turning over the money to the Treasury. If they do nothing, or fails to pass a joint resolution, the money goes anyway. That's a Constitutional kerfuffle if I've ever seen one.

This legislation is lethal. Plain and simple.

[geeoro]

I agree with you Paperhouse. This stinks of saving the Butts of the people who have huge investment in these failing companies, eg. Poulsons millions he has invested in Leehmans. As you said, my plan is too simple and will not save the greedy corrupt failing Banks etc. All they can see is "Bailout" so that THEY will not lose their money, but at the cost to the Taxpayer. They are also scaring the life out of everyone with this "The country will collapse" media feast. It won't collapse if thses companies fail. Other strong companies can buy assets from them and even mergers could take place. This is fear by the Fat Cat's that they will lose money.

[TnHilltopper]

Seems this bill will be turned over to marketing from here after. No longer will it be a "bail out" bill, it will be something like one of the following:

The American prosperity bill

The America first bill

The Mainstreet bonus award

The vote for this or we are all going to die bill

The shove it to Wall Street bill

It will be wrapped in pretty colors and from here on out the press will only talk of it in positive glowing terms and they will repeat it over and over and over and over again on every channel, all day and all night until enough Americans begin to say... hum that don't sound too bad. In fact, they are already doing it.

If the next bill doesn't pass they will go back and formulate another one and then another and then another until at some point it will be attached to something they use often in Congress. Vote to support the troops and America's prosperity act. That's right, don't vote for it and you hate the troops and will not fund them.... don't want the troops to die do you?

Absurd, yes but closer to the truth that you might think. The obvious problem with the bill is how it was packaged.

Now the bill might be good and the way to go, or it may be a disaster in the make in which after this bundle is handed over, more will be sure to follow. I don't know and the thing is, many of the worlds greatest economic minds all have their doubts over the sensibility of how this problem is being approached. To test the waters with both feet and simply allow the United States government, the greatest and most intelligent truth tellers of all time to act with impunity with your life seems at the very least, risky. More often than not, snap judgments and quick and rash decisions lead to bigger problems and unintended consquences.

I only think more time should be taken to address this and most importantly, the use of alternative input in the discussion.

[geeoro]

It is now the "Rescue" bill lol

[WHITEWOLF508]

Let's look at some reality here:
1. Many Americans have a sense of "entitlement"- they believe that they are entitled to a college education, brand new car and a house without working for these items.
2. Laws were passed and "entitlement" programs started after the riots in the 60s. Students that had poor grades, poor SATs and no money were sent to college with full scholarships in the various state university systems. Many graduated without even bothering to attend classes.
3. As they aged, they demanded more and more entitlements and were given them. These included housing, jobs and job set asides.
4. The govenment decreed that certain areas were "entitled" to non-traditional funding- read that as subprime-mortgages. The first programs were set up so that buyers only had to put 2.5% and could use rent receipts or notes from prominent people to attest to their good character instead of traditional credit reports.
5. It was a short step from there to 100 % OR MORE mortgages with NO documentation requirements. THe sponsoring agencies demanded that a certain portion of mortgages of this type be made and banks had to report quarterly on the applications submitted and mortgages approved- reverse redlining.

I worked for over twenty years in banking primarily in mortgage loan workout. This is not Republican or Democrat drivel or propaganda. It is what happened with Politically Correct idiots in both parties responsible

[geeoro]

They are simply covering their asses.