U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-01-2008, 10:01 PM
 
Location: South Central PA
1,563 posts, read 4,086,167 times
Reputation: 372

Advertisements

I was against the deal without a plan for taxpayers to be payed back in full or in excess. There were 3 provisions that would have done that:

1) Sale of Mortgage assets.
2) The treasury would have warrants to buy stock in any quantity and at any price they wanted in banks that sold their mortgage assets to the treasury, giving another avenue of payback.
3) After 5 years, there would be an evaluation of the plan. Any shortfall would then be payed for in some means by financial corporations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senate version of bailout bill
15 SEC. 134. RECOUPMENT.
16 Upon the expiration of the 5-year period beginning
17 upon the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director
18 of the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation
19 with the Director of the Congressional Budget Office, shall
20 submit a report to the Congress on the net amount within
21 the Troubled Asset Relief Program under this Act. In any
22 case where there is a shortfall, the President shall submit
23 a legislative proposal that recoups from the financial in-
24dustry an amount equal to the shortfall in order to ensure
1 that the Troubled Asset Relief Program does not add to
2 the deficit or national debt.
Thus, there would be no long term cost to the taxpayers. Only the chance of profit.

But those that were against it completely without reservations are those that want to "stick it to the man". Unfortunately, by doing so, they will be forfeiting tens, perhaps hundreds, of thousands of jobs.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-01-2008, 10:10 PM
 
Location: Dallas
4,621 posts, read 9,618,854 times
Reputation: 3876
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marodi View Post
I was against the deal without a plan for taxpayers to be payed back in full or in excess. There were 3 provisions that would have done that:

1) Sale of Mortgage assets.
2) The treasury would have warrants to buy stock in any quantity and at any price they wanted in banks that sold their mortgage assets to the treasury, giving another avenue of payback.
3) After 5 years, there would be an evaluation of the plan. Any shortfall would then be payed for in some means by financial corporations.


Thus, there would be no long term cost to the taxpayers. Only the chance of profit.

But those that were against it completely without reservations are those that want to "stick it to the man". Unfortunately, by doing so, they will be forfeiting tens, perhaps hundreds, of thousands of jobs.
I'll betcha if congress just took that $700B and distributed to the citizens much better would come of it than giving it to a blatant crook and incompetent like Paulson.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2008, 10:46 PM
 
48,507 posts, read 90,861,514 times
Reputation: 18204
But the problem is that many of those citizens are co-conspoirators in that they committed frud by sign false income satement to get the bad loans .They and the loan officers are in it together,. Get one then the other is brought into the case.I would bet that any home owner who sign such a satemnent would be advised to take the fifth.Lots of crroks to go around and all will say that they just didn't know what the truth was.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2008, 10:49 PM
 
Location: Dallas
4,621 posts, read 9,618,854 times
Reputation: 3876
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
But the problem is that many of those citizens are co-conspoirators in that they committed frud by sign false income satement to get the bad loans .They and the loan officers are in it together,. Get one then the other is brought into the case.I would bet that any home owner who sign such a satemnent would be advised to take the fifth.Lots of crroks to go around and all will say that they just didn't know what the truth was.
This money isn't going to any citizens. It's going to Wall St moguls, foremost of which is Paulsen from Goldman and Sacks. The masses aren't getting any gravy. That money will go directly offshore.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2008, 10:52 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,067 posts, read 78,894,765 times
Reputation: 27669
And the "assets" they are buying back is not limited to the US.

This bill was never about main street.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top