Carlyle group urges fast approval of bailout so it can help taxpayers

[Username]

Isn’t the Carlyle Group the one that Bush Sr is involved in? Smells like something foul and underhanded

[34f3f3f]

[quote=CA renter] Since we, the taxpayers, get to pay the banks’ wishing prices, the govt will probably “discover” after-the-fact that they really weren’t worth that much after all.

So…the banks get rid of their bad paper at their wishing price, the govt (that’s us) overpays for them, then they will be resold back into the private market at their true market price (much less than what we paid for them).[/quote]

I wouldn’t blame anyone for thinking this, but watching Paulson last night, I got the impression some Senators where asking the right questions, about how to establish the correct price in the so-called reverse auction.

Paulson doesn’t inspire confidence, but that may be just a personal prejudice, and Bernanke seems to play his cards close to his chest. The question that we are all dying to hear the answer to is; what is the consequence of no bail-out? Presumably, the reason we are being denied this, is because of the “run” it will have on those institutions as they are named. What is just as troubling is the push to rush this through, when really something like this needs to be very thoroughly debated.

The tax payer does of course have one recourse, and that is don’t pay your tax. Or maybe we should just dump all these toxic loans into Boston Harbor.

[34f3f3f]

[quote=CA renter] Since we, the taxpayers, get to pay the banks’ wishing prices, the govt will probably “discover” after-the-fact that they really weren’t worth that much after all.

So…the banks get rid of their bad paper at their wishing price, the govt (that’s us) overpays for them, then they will be resold back into the private market at their true market price (much less than what we paid for them).[/quote]

I wouldn’t blame anyone for thinking this, but watching Paulson last night, I got the impression some Senators where asking the right questions, about how to establish the correct price in the so-called reverse auction.

Paulson doesn’t inspire confidence, but that may be just a personal prejudice, and Bernanke seems to play his cards close to his chest. The question that we are all dying to hear the answer to is; what is the consequence of no bail-out? Presumably, the reason we are being denied this, is because of the “run” it will have on those institutions as they are named. What is just as troubling is the push to rush this through, when really something like this needs to be very thoroughly debated.

The tax payer does of course have one recourse, and that is don’t pay your tax. Or maybe we should just dump all these toxic loans into Boston Harbor.

[34f3f3f]

[quote=CA renter] Since we, the taxpayers, get to pay the banks’ wishing prices, the govt will probably “discover” after-the-fact that they really weren’t worth that much after all.

So…the banks get rid of their bad paper at their wishing price, the govt (that’s us) overpays for them, then they will be resold back into the private market at their true market price (much less than what we paid for them).[/quote]

I wouldn’t blame anyone for thinking this, but watching Paulson last night, I got the impression some Senators where asking the right questions, about how to establish the correct price in the so-called reverse auction.

Paulson doesn’t inspire confidence, but that may be just a personal prejudice, and Bernanke seems to play his cards close to his chest. The question that we are all dying to hear the answer to is; what is the consequence of no bail-out? Presumably, the reason we are being denied this, is because of the “run” it will have on those institutions as they are named. What is just as troubling is the push to rush this through, when really something like this needs to be very thoroughly debated.

The tax payer does of course have one recourse, and that is don’t pay your tax. Or maybe we should just dump all these toxic loans into Boston Harbor.

[34f3f3f]

[quote=CA renter] Since we, the taxpayers, get to pay the banks’ wishing prices, the govt will probably “discover” after-the-fact that they really weren’t worth that much after all.

So…the banks get rid of their bad paper at their wishing price, the govt (that’s us) overpays for them, then they will be resold back into the private market at their true market price (much less than what we paid for them).[/quote]

I wouldn’t blame anyone for thinking this, but watching Paulson last night, I got the impression some Senators where asking the right questions, about how to establish the correct price in the so-called reverse auction.

Paulson doesn’t inspire confidence, but that may be just a personal prejudice, and Bernanke seems to play his cards close to his chest. The question that we are all dying to hear the answer to is; what is the consequence of no bail-out? Presumably, the reason we are being denied this, is because of the “run” it will have on those institutions as they are named. What is just as troubling is the push to rush this through, when really something like this needs to be very thoroughly debated.

The tax payer does of course have one recourse, and that is don’t pay your tax. Or maybe we should just dump all these toxic loans into Boston Harbor.

[34f3f3f]

[quote=CA renter] Since we, the taxpayers, get to pay the banks’ wishing prices, the govt will probably “discover” after-the-fact that they really weren’t worth that much after all.

So…the banks get rid of their bad paper at their wishing price, the govt (that’s us) overpays for them, then they will be resold back into the private market at their true market price (much less than what we paid for them).[/quote]

I wouldn’t blame anyone for thinking this, but watching Paulson last night, I got the impression some Senators where asking the right questions, about how to establish the correct price in the so-called reverse auction.

Paulson doesn’t inspire confidence, but that may be just a personal prejudice, and Bernanke seems to play his cards close to his chest. The question that we are all dying to hear the answer to is; what is the consequence of no bail-out? Presumably, the reason we are being denied this, is because of the “run” it will have on those institutions as they are named. What is just as troubling is the push to rush this through, when really something like this needs to be very thoroughly debated.

The tax payer does of course have one recourse, and that is don’t pay your tax. Or maybe we should just dump all these toxic loans into Boston Harbor.

[Nor-LA-SD-guy]

No expert here but it seems to me making more credit available is not going to solve the problem,

People need to make more money to pay their debts I would think is the solution.

But that’s just me….

[Nor-LA-SD-guy]

No expert here but it seems to me making more credit available is not going to solve the problem,

People need to make more money to pay their debts I would think is the solution.

But that’s just me….

[Nor-LA-SD-guy]

No expert here but it seems to me making more credit available is not going to solve the problem,

People need to make more money to pay their debts I would think is the solution.

But that’s just me….

[Nor-LA-SD-guy]

No expert here but it seems to me making more credit available is not going to solve the problem,

People need to make more money to pay their debts I would think is the solution.

But that’s just me….

[Nor-LA-SD-guy]

No expert here but it seems to me making more credit available is not going to solve the problem,

People need to make more money to pay their debts I would think is the solution.

But that’s just me….

[alarmclock]

I heard this analogy today, can anyone comment as to its correctness?

The financial companies which stand to benefit from the bailout, and the domestic automakers as well are all like people that have overindulged in payday loans. They are basically running back and forth between different payday loan companies, getting a new loan to pay off the old loan. Thats the only way they can stay in business.

If this is correct, then it sickens me that these are the organizations we are going to support. They need to be taken off of life support.

[alarmclock]

I heard this analogy today, can anyone comment as to its correctness?

The financial companies which stand to benefit from the bailout, and the domestic automakers as well are all like people that have overindulged in payday loans. They are basically running back and forth between different payday loan companies, getting a new loan to pay off the old loan. Thats the only way they can stay in business.

If this is correct, then it sickens me that these are the organizations we are going to support. They need to be taken off of life support.

[alarmclock]

I heard this analogy today, can anyone comment as to its correctness?

The financial companies which stand to benefit from the bailout, and the domestic automakers as well are all like people that have overindulged in payday loans. They are basically running back and forth between different payday loan companies, getting a new loan to pay off the old loan. Thats the only way they can stay in business.

If this is correct, then it sickens me that these are the organizations we are going to support. They need to be taken off of life support.

[alarmclock]

I heard this analogy today, can anyone comment as to its correctness?

The financial companies which stand to benefit from the bailout, and the domestic automakers as well are all like people that have overindulged in payday loans. They are basically running back and forth between different payday loan companies, getting a new loan to pay off the old loan. Thats the only way they can stay in business.

If this is correct, then it sickens me that these are the organizations we are going to support. They need to be taken off of life support.

[Author]

Posts