I was intrigued by the “bottom-feeder” story! Does this mean that it would be possible for the federal “bailout” plan to be structured such that it implements this “bottom-feeding” process on a large scale?
It would create some jobs in the slumping economy, and it would help to get the “shadow inventory” clearing faster, the price correction to occur more rapidly, the banks to get some liquidity back into their system, the house-“owners” to either move on with a little cash in their pocket or pay a mortgage they can actually afford, all the while not costing taxpayers too much since the operation is actually profitable.
I normally never believe in anything Bush says, and as usual I sneered when he said he didn’t support the bailout bill because it would cost taxpayers. It seemed like one might oppose bailout as a matter of principle, but to complain a particular version of the bailout as costing taxpayers’ money! But maybe he actually has some suave financial adviser who sees the possibility of bottom-feeding on a large scale?
