Posted on 09/23/2008 10:40:48 AM PDT by Jet Jaguar
Would there really be a depression if we didn't bail out Wall Street and implement McObama's great leap to socialism and regulated corporatism. Robert Higgs a distinguished economist challenges the Chicken Littles to provide some evidence. See here for this claim.
>>lift lines on Saturdays in MT.
>>The singles line on Saturdays allows yet
>>another day of yo-yo skiing.
The Colorado Plains are in my back yard - a resource to be developed and exploited by folks who’d rather not fight the traffic up into the mountains.
I see economic opportunity in kite-snowboarding. ;-)
DeMint is the man! This guy is going up the ranks of the party. I love DeMint!
Better yet, take $700 B and invest it all into upward mobility for the country, energy first, roadways, telecommunications, skilled job creation, exports and yes, domestic manufacturing. Reform the tax system and healthcare as well. Yes, we might have a depression but any would be short lived. If the bailout fails, you get a depression later in any event.
We won’t go into another great depression. A lot of the gloom and doom being spread and the cost of not doing the bail out are inflated and in many cases not talking real money but lost profits. Tell me why we should preserve the profits and investments of the people who caused this? I agree with DeMint, fix the problem don’t just throw money at it. Socialism is bad for everyone. Why the Bush admin is following Paulson, a liberal Democrat, into this and excusing people like Chris Dodd the head of the Banking Committee who has had his head up Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae’s skirt raking in the money through his relationship with them while opposing any reform perplexes me. Rushing into this pretending that the problems in the housing market are going to go away if we just let the government administer it and buy up every worthless loan out there is stupid. It also will drive housing costs up and prolong the problem of inflated housing costs. Some of these loans were never realistic to begin with and it was Easy high risk credit that caused the problem. Some shrinkage on the credit front would force people to deal in real cash and would drive costs of everything down. Sure it might hurt but this financial world of fiction we’ve been living in with too much credit and not enough backing will not go away if we continue with this bailout. This is a chance to offer a different solution. America does not want this Bailout.
“We won’t go into another great depression.”
Probably not, but the better questions are:
1) Is the cost of doing nothing greater than the cost of doing the Paulson plan?
Answer: YES. Most people (including me) are convinced the meltdown will be serious if we cant get this assets disposed of in an orderly way.
2) Is there a better way to fix this than that plan?
Answer: Probably yes. For one suspend mark-to-market. For 2 move to regulate and privatize the GSEs. For 3 make Bush tax cuts permanent as a stimulus. See links from my posts,
http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/
“Why the Bush admin is following Paulson, a liberal Democrat, into this and excusing people like Chris Dodd the head of the Banking Committee who has had his head up Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae’s skirt raking in the money through his relationship with them while opposing any reform perplexes me.”
- It feels like lame duckery. The Bush administration is leaving this in Paulson’s hands. Bush has no other choice - these are the guys he hired to do the job of overseeing these areas and this is their call. For the President to diagree with a Fed chairman saying “this is serious” is begging for a stock market crash. So he has to be on board for the ‘greater good’. And Paulson’s a wall st jock and a Democrat as you say, not a free-market conservative ... whoo boy.
DeMint is solid....Graham is a toetapping cabana boy.
$700 Billion would pay for 400GW of nuclear power. 400 power plants. That’s enough to stave of recession and make us energy independent.
Go for it.
We won't get our house in order by putting another $2-4 trillion on the national VISA card.
DeMint is solid....Graham is a toetapping cabana boy.
DITTO
I can almost vote for a Democrat over Graham, but then I start to loose it. As with the president, it’s a vote for the lesser of two evils. I’m not for, I’m just more against XYZ.
Where are you getting those wild numbers: It wont be that much. Work the numbers right and the paulson bailout will be net cost of zero. Like cost is $100-300 billion, about what 5 years of farm bill cost, and less than the housing bailout already passed.
I would prefer a free market approach but the predictions of cost are just wrong.
COmment on seeking alpha:
1.Mortgages that default are not worth zero.
2.Mortgages that pay are not worth ‘par’.
3.There is no real market for these mortgages.
4.Just because there is no market (today) does not make the assets valueless.
5.Mark to market pricing is a disaster. Your house is not always worth what you could get if YOU HAD to sell your house in 24 hours.
6. Yes, the taxpayers will take a hit. Some % of the bailout will not be recovered.
8.If 1/3 to 1/2 the financial institutions in America go insolvent, and business lending and consumer lending grinds to a halt, the tax payers will take a hit as well.
9.The plan is not perfect, but the alternative is mighty scary!
Yes! Some sanity — good work, DeMint!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.