Dianne Feinstein’s Response to the Bailout

[TheBreeze]

[quote=urbanrealtor]

While I agree that the patriot act was planned, I am not sure how the bailout benefits anyone.

I mean the patriot act brought US public safety standards to something closer to the rest of the world. I (and many others) disagree with it because most of the governments of the world are too intrusive and controlling. But the point was that there was a large powerful lobby that always wanted the measures of the patriot act adopted.

I don’t see that same kind of lobby for this measure. Its more like the “surge” in Iraq. It might be very successful and improve stability but it is really just dressed up damage control. I do think that the parts of our economy that led us here DID have a huge lobby (deregulation, loose money, loose securitization rules).

Hopefully the remedy will garner a huge lobby and address the causes as well. We’ll see.[/quote]

My god you are naive. No lobby for $700 billion? Your buddies at NAR have been begging for a bailout for months. PIMCO’s Bill Gross can’t wait to get his hands on that taxpayer money. There are tons of other bagholders out there who can’t wait to unload crappy mortgages on the taxpayer.

Who do you think is writing this bill? Congresspeople? Not a chance. This bill is most assuredly being written by lobbyists.

Do you live in a bubble or something? I don’t see how else you could believe that lobbyists wouldn’t be involved when $700 billion is at stake.

[barnaby33]

Do you live in a bubble or something? I don’t see how else you could believe that lobbyists wouldn’t be involved when $700 billion is at stake.

Never underestimate the stupidity of people in groups. I would say that from my perspective the very tenets of the plan show that it was indeed not planned at all. The treasury secretary just said gimme or else! Congress scrambled to look like it was doing something. Its still scrambling. Lets hope they fail to do anything.

Josh

[barnaby33]

Do you live in a bubble or something? I don’t see how else you could believe that lobbyists wouldn’t be involved when $700 billion is at stake.

Never underestimate the stupidity of people in groups. I would say that from my perspective the very tenets of the plan show that it was indeed not planned at all. The treasury secretary just said gimme or else! Congress scrambled to look like it was doing something. Its still scrambling. Lets hope they fail to do anything.

Josh

[barnaby33]

Do you live in a bubble or something? I don’t see how else you could believe that lobbyists wouldn’t be involved when $700 billion is at stake.

Never underestimate the stupidity of people in groups. I would say that from my perspective the very tenets of the plan show that it was indeed not planned at all. The treasury secretary just said gimme or else! Congress scrambled to look like it was doing something. Its still scrambling. Lets hope they fail to do anything.

Josh

[barnaby33]

Do you live in a bubble or something? I don’t see how else you could believe that lobbyists wouldn’t be involved when $700 billion is at stake.

Never underestimate the stupidity of people in groups. I would say that from my perspective the very tenets of the plan show that it was indeed not planned at all. The treasury secretary just said gimme or else! Congress scrambled to look like it was doing something. Its still scrambling. Lets hope they fail to do anything.

Josh

[barnaby33]

Do you live in a bubble or something? I don’t see how else you could believe that lobbyists wouldn’t be involved when $700 billion is at stake.

Never underestimate the stupidity of people in groups. I would say that from my perspective the very tenets of the plan show that it was indeed not planned at all. The treasury secretary just said gimme or else! Congress scrambled to look like it was doing something. Its still scrambling. Lets hope they fail to do anything.

Josh

[meadandale]

[quote=barnaby33]Never underestimate the stupidity of people in groups. [/quote]

Meetings

[meadandale]

[quote=barnaby33]Never underestimate the stupidity of people in groups. [/quote]

Meetings

[meadandale]

[quote=barnaby33]Never underestimate the stupidity of people in groups. [/quote]

Meetings

[meadandale]

[quote=barnaby33]Never underestimate the stupidity of people in groups. [/quote]

Meetings

[meadandale]

[quote=barnaby33]Never underestimate the stupidity of people in groups. [/quote]

Meetings

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=TheBreeze][quote=urbanrealtor]

While I agree that the patriot act was planned, I am not sure how the bailout benefits anyone.

I mean the patriot act brought US public safety standards to something closer to the rest of the world. I (and many others) disagree with it because most of the governments of the world are too intrusive and controlling. But the point was that there was a large powerful lobby that always wanted the measures of the patriot act adopted.

I don’t see that same kind of lobby for this measure. Its more like the “surge” in Iraq. It might be very successful and improve stability but it is really just dressed up damage control. I do think that the parts of our economy that led us here DID have a huge lobby (deregulation, loose money, loose securitization rules).

Hopefully the remedy will garner a huge lobby and address the causes as well. We’ll see.[/quote]

My god you are naive. No lobby for $700 billion? Your buddies at NAR have been begging for a bailout for months. PIMCO’s Bill Gross can’t wait to get his hands on that taxpayer money. There are tons of other bagholders out there who can’t wait to unload crappy mortgages on the taxpayer.

Who do you think is writing this bill? Congresspeople? Not a chance. This bill is most assuredly being written by lobbyists.

Do you live in a bubble or something? I don’t see how else you could believe that lobbyists wouldn’t be involved when $700 billion is at stake.

[/quote]
Again, I don’t think that making personal attacks strengthens your case.
You may note that I did not say lobbyists.
I said a lobby and not a group of professional lobbyists.
A pro lobbyist is like Jack Abramoff who takes legislators out to lunch or buys them a boat.
I was referring to an interested group who want to sway an outcome (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/lobby). Specifically, the will of the public. I think that the public opinion polls tend to support my thesis (http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/26/news/economy/easton_backlash.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2008092810).

I don’t think that NAR (with whom I do not generally agree on anything) or PIMCO were the prime movers behind this bill. They just don’t have that much juice. Some parts of this may suit their interests but I don’t recall them asking for this particular type of securities purchase before. Do you know of such a request? Again I do not see a lobby other than a few of the most senior consulting economists.

Whom do you see being a interested party pushing for this? Who is really going to get rich off of this bailout?
I really would be happy to be proven wrong on this.
If you have data that matches your assertions, I will listen.

Insults make arguments weak. If you want me to take your assertions seriously, you should present them seriously. I am not immune to being convinced by good reasoning.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=TheBreeze][quote=urbanrealtor]

While I agree that the patriot act was planned, I am not sure how the bailout benefits anyone.

I mean the patriot act brought US public safety standards to something closer to the rest of the world. I (and many others) disagree with it because most of the governments of the world are too intrusive and controlling. But the point was that there was a large powerful lobby that always wanted the measures of the patriot act adopted.

I don’t see that same kind of lobby for this measure. Its more like the “surge” in Iraq. It might be very successful and improve stability but it is really just dressed up damage control. I do think that the parts of our economy that led us here DID have a huge lobby (deregulation, loose money, loose securitization rules).

Hopefully the remedy will garner a huge lobby and address the causes as well. We’ll see.[/quote]

My god you are naive. No lobby for $700 billion? Your buddies at NAR have been begging for a bailout for months. PIMCO’s Bill Gross can’t wait to get his hands on that taxpayer money. There are tons of other bagholders out there who can’t wait to unload crappy mortgages on the taxpayer.

Who do you think is writing this bill? Congresspeople? Not a chance. This bill is most assuredly being written by lobbyists.

Do you live in a bubble or something? I don’t see how else you could believe that lobbyists wouldn’t be involved when $700 billion is at stake.

[/quote]
Again, I don’t think that making personal attacks strengthens your case.
You may note that I did not say lobbyists.
I said a lobby and not a group of professional lobbyists.
A pro lobbyist is like Jack Abramoff who takes legislators out to lunch or buys them a boat.
I was referring to an interested group who want to sway an outcome (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/lobby). Specifically, the will of the public. I think that the public opinion polls tend to support my thesis (http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/26/news/economy/easton_backlash.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2008092810).

I don’t think that NAR (with whom I do not generally agree on anything) or PIMCO were the prime movers behind this bill. They just don’t have that much juice. Some parts of this may suit their interests but I don’t recall them asking for this particular type of securities purchase before. Do you know of such a request? Again I do not see a lobby other than a few of the most senior consulting economists.

Whom do you see being a interested party pushing for this? Who is really going to get rich off of this bailout?
I really would be happy to be proven wrong on this.
If you have data that matches your assertions, I will listen.

Insults make arguments weak. If you want me to take your assertions seriously, you should present them seriously. I am not immune to being convinced by good reasoning.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=TheBreeze][quote=urbanrealtor]

While I agree that the patriot act was planned, I am not sure how the bailout benefits anyone.

I mean the patriot act brought US public safety standards to something closer to the rest of the world. I (and many others) disagree with it because most of the governments of the world are too intrusive and controlling. But the point was that there was a large powerful lobby that always wanted the measures of the patriot act adopted.

I don’t see that same kind of lobby for this measure. Its more like the “surge” in Iraq. It might be very successful and improve stability but it is really just dressed up damage control. I do think that the parts of our economy that led us here DID have a huge lobby (deregulation, loose money, loose securitization rules).

Hopefully the remedy will garner a huge lobby and address the causes as well. We’ll see.[/quote]

My god you are naive. No lobby for $700 billion? Your buddies at NAR have been begging for a bailout for months. PIMCO’s Bill Gross can’t wait to get his hands on that taxpayer money. There are tons of other bagholders out there who can’t wait to unload crappy mortgages on the taxpayer.

Who do you think is writing this bill? Congresspeople? Not a chance. This bill is most assuredly being written by lobbyists.

Do you live in a bubble or something? I don’t see how else you could believe that lobbyists wouldn’t be involved when $700 billion is at stake.

[/quote]
Again, I don’t think that making personal attacks strengthens your case.
You may note that I did not say lobbyists.
I said a lobby and not a group of professional lobbyists.
A pro lobbyist is like Jack Abramoff who takes legislators out to lunch or buys them a boat.
I was referring to an interested group who want to sway an outcome (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/lobby). Specifically, the will of the public. I think that the public opinion polls tend to support my thesis (http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/26/news/economy/easton_backlash.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2008092810).

I don’t think that NAR (with whom I do not generally agree on anything) or PIMCO were the prime movers behind this bill. They just don’t have that much juice. Some parts of this may suit their interests but I don’t recall them asking for this particular type of securities purchase before. Do you know of such a request? Again I do not see a lobby other than a few of the most senior consulting economists.

Whom do you see being a interested party pushing for this? Who is really going to get rich off of this bailout?
I really would be happy to be proven wrong on this.
If you have data that matches your assertions, I will listen.

Insults make arguments weak. If you want me to take your assertions seriously, you should present them seriously. I am not immune to being convinced by good reasoning.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=TheBreeze][quote=urbanrealtor]

While I agree that the patriot act was planned, I am not sure how the bailout benefits anyone.

I mean the patriot act brought US public safety standards to something closer to the rest of the world. I (and many others) disagree with it because most of the governments of the world are too intrusive and controlling. But the point was that there was a large powerful lobby that always wanted the measures of the patriot act adopted.

I don’t see that same kind of lobby for this measure. Its more like the “surge” in Iraq. It might be very successful and improve stability but it is really just dressed up damage control. I do think that the parts of our economy that led us here DID have a huge lobby (deregulation, loose money, loose securitization rules).

Hopefully the remedy will garner a huge lobby and address the causes as well. We’ll see.[/quote]

My god you are naive. No lobby for $700 billion? Your buddies at NAR have been begging for a bailout for months. PIMCO’s Bill Gross can’t wait to get his hands on that taxpayer money. There are tons of other bagholders out there who can’t wait to unload crappy mortgages on the taxpayer.

Who do you think is writing this bill? Congresspeople? Not a chance. This bill is most assuredly being written by lobbyists.

Do you live in a bubble or something? I don’t see how else you could believe that lobbyists wouldn’t be involved when $700 billion is at stake.

[/quote]
Again, I don’t think that making personal attacks strengthens your case.
You may note that I did not say lobbyists.
I said a lobby and not a group of professional lobbyists.
A pro lobbyist is like Jack Abramoff who takes legislators out to lunch or buys them a boat.
I was referring to an interested group who want to sway an outcome (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/lobby). Specifically, the will of the public. I think that the public opinion polls tend to support my thesis (http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/26/news/economy/easton_backlash.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2008092810).

I don’t think that NAR (with whom I do not generally agree on anything) or PIMCO were the prime movers behind this bill. They just don’t have that much juice. Some parts of this may suit their interests but I don’t recall them asking for this particular type of securities purchase before. Do you know of such a request? Again I do not see a lobby other than a few of the most senior consulting economists.

Whom do you see being a interested party pushing for this? Who is really going to get rich off of this bailout?
I really would be happy to be proven wrong on this.
If you have data that matches your assertions, I will listen.

Insults make arguments weak. If you want me to take your assertions seriously, you should present them seriously. I am not immune to being convinced by good reasoning.

[Author]

Posts