Bailout in Doubt? Paulson, Bernanke Take Bipartisan Fire

No Bailout. If it is a recession - too bad. Our Government is obviously intoxicated with the power of Kings.

NO BAILOUT.

NO BAILOUT - Force all of Congress and the House to give every single penny that each slug has taken from Fanny and Freddy and every other lobbiest, company,etc., to the fed as the bailout. And, have each government politician and employee forfiet their pension, and take a 20% cut in pay. The bloated and corrupt government and the debt from it is the problem.

Agreed. No bailout. I'll lose a lot short term, but win in the long term.

Well, not all "Constituents hold a "universally negative'' opinion toward the proposal" .. and I'm one that doesn't. Despite the press headlines that try to make this out as a 'Bailout', it's hardly a giveaway. With the Govt passing out loans at some pretty high interest rates, buying mortgages for pennies on the dollar that may see some substantial appreciation in value in a couple years, and so on - the provisions of this proposal may possibly make the taxpayers a ton of money later on. Hardly a 'bailout'. Yea, we ought to be hard on the CEOs who ruined their companies, etc. - but we can do that later with follow-on legislation. For now, let's get the damn thing PASSED...!!!

Well, not all "Constituents hold a "universally negative'' opinion toward the proposal" .. and I'm one that doesn't. Despite the press headlines that try to make this out as a 'Bailout', it's hardly a giveaway. With the Govt passing out loans at some pretty high interest rates, buying mortgages for pennies on the dollar that may see some substantial appreciation in value in a couple years, and so on - the provisions of this proposal may possibly make the taxpayers a ton of money later on. Hardly a 'bailout'. Yea, we ought to be hard on the CEOs who ruined their companies, etc. - but we can do that later with follow-on legislation. For now, let's get the damn thing PASSED...!!!

Now we know what that $600 was all about, to soften up their mark; the American tax-paying SAPS.....700 BILLION WON'T FIX YEARS OF ABUSE, AND PRETEND PRICES IN THE WORLD MARKETS.........LIKE THE WAR, THEY WILL KEEP COMING FOR MORE........MORE, MORE, MORE......THAT'S ALL THESE PEOPLE KNOW.

If the Treasury sent out a $4000 check to each taxpayer next week ($700 billion divided by last year's taxpayer number), the banks would be flush with cash deposits and repaid loans, the economy would boom by Christmas and the stock market would be above DOW 20,000 in 2009!!!! I vote for tax rebate checks!!! Power to the people...

I agree. Seizing Fannie and Freddie was one thing, this is something else entirely. Tough love Wall Street, Tough love. All investments have risk. What we're saying is it's the Governments (Taxpayers) job to remove risk from the market with this bailout. Let's just make one investment available to the public that get's a guarenteed 6% interest. That's what it's starting to look like if we don't let these people lose. Why is there all those disclaimers if they have no meaning?

Let the market work. Stop trying to prop it up with false values. We will be better off in the long run. If we do infuse the system with cash, it should be in the form of an ownership interest in the banks. That way we avoid the risk of overpaying for the debt and we retain the chance of a decent profit. We are essentially on the hook for the banks anyway, so lets just take an ownership interest in those that need the cash infusion - similar to AIG. May as well buy into some of the valuable assets also.

Very SUSPICIOUS of bailout,.....especially at "mature mortgage' values. I'm only barely old enough to remember my Grandfather's stories of the depression,....maybe we need it,..God help us,.. I am personally as prepared as can be,.....

I fault the author (in particular), and the news media (in general) for all the panic. The vast majority of them have nothing to loose. Its the home owners with mortages facing forclosure that are in trouble. The recent bill passed by Congress offers a reasonable alternative. Refinance at a reasonable percentage of the current value of the house and at a reasonable rate, assuming the the mortgage holder is capable at the reduced payment level, and swallow the difference. This is certainly better thanforclosing and have no current income. I would like to know how many, if any, are taking advantage of it.

I am not a huge fan AT ALL of a bailout that is so one-sided, we accept the risk with no 'pay back 'or 'return' for the increased tax burden. The thought of directly subsidizing these greedy people and indirectly subsidizing those who thought they could short cut their way to the good life really REALLY cuts to my core. All that being said - this is a 'financial CIVIL WAR' we are engaged in - and I am a patriot - I will support the decision of our elected officials. Mike

I am not a huge fan AT ALL of a bailout that is so one-sided, we accept the risk with no 'pay back 'or 'return' for the increased tax burden. The thought of directly subsidizing these greedy people and indirectly subsidizing those who thought they could short cut their way to the good life really REALLY cuts to my core. All that being said - this is a 'financial CIVIL WAR' we are engaged in - and I am a patriot - I will support the decision of our elected officials. Mike

He is correct - the trillion is $4000 per capita, wow, and, the nation does not have the money, hence we must borrow, and from whom? Only foreigners, again, have the funds, Chinese, mostly. When we bloat our debt in this manner, the dollar will devalue, so I ask the reader, why should anyone, incl the Chinese loan us trillions, buying bonds that will will run all negative, returning large losses to them? They perhaps will if they get higher interest, which will kill our economy, or other perks, like the uncontested right to buy equities. We are are sold down the river by this bailout, Better to say no.

Yes bailout. No reason to have another Great Depression just because a bunch of populist morons want to burn rich peoples' houses, even if the fire spreads to their hovel.

He is correct - the trillion is $4000 per capita, wow, and, the nation does not have the money, hence we must borrow, and from whom? Only foreigners, again, have the funds, Chinese, mostly. When we bloat our debt in this manner, the dollar will devalue, so I ask the reader, why should anyone, incl the Chinese loan us trillions, buying bonds that will will run all negative, returning large losses to them? They perhaps will if they get higher interest, which will kill our economy, or other perks, like the uncontested right to buy equities. We are are sold down the river by this bailout, Better to say no.

It seems like most of the group is against the bailout as it's now proposed -- so am I. I do believe that something needs to be done, but bailing out the powerful at the expense of the rest of us seems wrong on its face. If the root of the problem is bad mortgage loans, could it be possible that helping guarantee or float those loans for a period of time would have a better direct effect than simply bailing out the banks? At least that way, both the banks and the normal folks benefit. That is, of course, unless the banks are hanging onto a bunch of other bad debt that's got nothing to do with mortgages....In that case, shame on them, and good riddance.

No BAIL OUT!

I think most people don't understand how markets really work. There is a tremendous multiplier effect when a bank makes a loan - the borrower gets the money, deposits that into his bank account and that deposit in turn gets included in the depository banks "reserve requirement" which allows IT to make more loans. If this flow is cut off it is much more significant than simply one bank not lending. The ripple effect is enormous and it could easily drag us down into a deep, deep recession where millions are out of work, savings and retirement accounts disappear, tax revenues plummet - the costs to the economy at large will be FAR greater than $700 billion. The biggest issue with a lot of these "bad" loans is that even though many of them are still performing on some level there is simply no market for them because people are so unsure so the value are depressed to a much greater degree than they would be in calmer times. The true economic value of these assets over time is a lot higher than the market is assigning in this crisis mode. But accounting rules force companies to carry these assets on their books at the fire sale value, which artificially depresses the capital levels they would have in a stable market with exactly the same assets. A lot of companies have gotten into serious difficulty not because of terrible mismanagement but simply because the value of a lot of these assets plummeted in a dramatically short period of time - before they could react. If the Treasury takes over these assets it injects fresh capital into the businesses and allows them to resume normal operations and ensure the flow of credit. I feel strongly the plan should be approved and over time a lot of the assets will increase in value and can then be sold at a profit, thus ultimately making money for the taxpayer. Obviously this won't be true in all cases but it will be in many instances. The cost of NOT approving the plan will greatly exceed $700 Billion, and that cost will be reflected in a lot of job losses, business failures, foreclosures, enormous losses in investment portfolios - all at a much more personal level than the national deficit - which is already at $10 trillion and has weighed heavily on the value of the dollar for quite some time. A deep recession cuts even more deeply into tax revenues and the deficit will grow accordingly since govt. expenditures won't shrink any. Approve the plan, quickly please.