[TheBreeze]

[quote=gandalf]

I’m not supporting “No Banker Left Behind”. I feel incredibly conflicted and am morally disgusted with the bailout. Just saying it’s not an easy issue, and hard to paint in partisan terms — Dems did this, Reps did that, etc. These are not ordinary times.

If it matters, I’m absolutely for Bailout version 2.0 over version 1.0, the “European Version”. US Govt should receive equity in troubled banks with the opportunity to liquidate holdings once the markets regain footing. This is slightly less disgusting than relieving banks of bad loans. Both solutions are pretty much awful though.[/quote]

Each bailout is pretty horrible and each is designed to reflate the bubble. It’s likely that each bailout will fail. If the bailouts “succeed”, it willl likely lead to hyperinflation in the long run.

To me, it seems all that’s needed is some full-reserve banks to deal with short-term business transactions. I believe CA Renter made this suggestion the other day. There’s no reason the taxpayer should be on the hook to fund the profits generated from businesses “sophisticated cash-management techniques”.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=gandalf]

I’m not supporting “No Banker Left Behind”. I feel incredibly conflicted and am morally disgusted with the bailout. Just saying it’s not an easy issue, and hard to paint in partisan terms — Dems did this, Reps did that, etc. These are not ordinary times.

If it matters, I’m absolutely for Bailout version 2.0 over version 1.0, the “European Version”. US Govt should receive equity in troubled banks with the opportunity to liquidate holdings once the markets regain footing. This is slightly less disgusting than relieving banks of bad loans. Both solutions are pretty much awful though.[/quote]

Each bailout is pretty horrible and each is designed to reflate the bubble. It’s likely that each bailout will fail. If the bailouts “succeed”, it willl likely lead to hyperinflation in the long run.

To me, it seems all that’s needed is some full-reserve banks to deal with short-term business transactions. I believe CA Renter made this suggestion the other day. There’s no reason the taxpayer should be on the hook to fund the profits generated from businesses “sophisticated cash-management techniques”.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=gandalf]

I’m not supporting “No Banker Left Behind”. I feel incredibly conflicted and am morally disgusted with the bailout. Just saying it’s not an easy issue, and hard to paint in partisan terms — Dems did this, Reps did that, etc. These are not ordinary times.

If it matters, I’m absolutely for Bailout version 2.0 over version 1.0, the “European Version”. US Govt should receive equity in troubled banks with the opportunity to liquidate holdings once the markets regain footing. This is slightly less disgusting than relieving banks of bad loans. Both solutions are pretty much awful though.[/quote]

Each bailout is pretty horrible and each is designed to reflate the bubble. It’s likely that each bailout will fail. If the bailouts “succeed”, it willl likely lead to hyperinflation in the long run.

To me, it seems all that’s needed is some full-reserve banks to deal with short-term business transactions. I believe CA Renter made this suggestion the other day. There’s no reason the taxpayer should be on the hook to fund the profits generated from businesses “sophisticated cash-management techniques”.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=gandalf]

I’m not supporting “No Banker Left Behind”. I feel incredibly conflicted and am morally disgusted with the bailout. Just saying it’s not an easy issue, and hard to paint in partisan terms — Dems did this, Reps did that, etc. These are not ordinary times.

If it matters, I’m absolutely for Bailout version 2.0 over version 1.0, the “European Version”. US Govt should receive equity in troubled banks with the opportunity to liquidate holdings once the markets regain footing. This is slightly less disgusting than relieving banks of bad loans. Both solutions are pretty much awful though.[/quote]

Each bailout is pretty horrible and each is designed to reflate the bubble. It’s likely that each bailout will fail. If the bailouts “succeed”, it willl likely lead to hyperinflation in the long run.

To me, it seems all that’s needed is some full-reserve banks to deal with short-term business transactions. I believe CA Renter made this suggestion the other day. There’s no reason the taxpayer should be on the hook to fund the profits generated from businesses “sophisticated cash-management techniques”.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=gandalf]

I’m not supporting “No Banker Left Behind”. I feel incredibly conflicted and am morally disgusted with the bailout. Just saying it’s not an easy issue, and hard to paint in partisan terms — Dems did this, Reps did that, etc. These are not ordinary times.

If it matters, I’m absolutely for Bailout version 2.0 over version 1.0, the “European Version”. US Govt should receive equity in troubled banks with the opportunity to liquidate holdings once the markets regain footing. This is slightly less disgusting than relieving banks of bad loans. Both solutions are pretty much awful though.[/quote]

Each bailout is pretty horrible and each is designed to reflate the bubble. It’s likely that each bailout will fail. If the bailouts “succeed”, it willl likely lead to hyperinflation in the long run.

To me, it seems all that’s needed is some full-reserve banks to deal with short-term business transactions. I believe CA Renter made this suggestion the other day. There’s no reason the taxpayer should be on the hook to fund the profits generated from businesses “sophisticated cash-management techniques”.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=asianautica]
People like me? Sorry to burst your bubble but I NEVER voted for Bush. I’m also not voting for McCain this year, just to get it out there so you don’t look like a dumbass making false accusation. Yes, lets vote out all those Democrats and Republicans who voted for all these bailouts. I’m all for that. FYI, Obama voted for the bailouts. Ron Paul a REPUBLICAN voted AGAINST the bailouts. So, using your logic, since you support Obama, you are rewarding criminals who rape the system at every opportunity.
[/quote]

Good point. Ron Paul does seem to have the most economically sensible policies. It’s too bad he’s not on the ballot in California. I may yet vote for Bob Barr as Ron Paul’s proxy. I will be voting against Democratic Representative Susan A. Davis because she voted for the bailout.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=asianautica]
People like me? Sorry to burst your bubble but I NEVER voted for Bush. I’m also not voting for McCain this year, just to get it out there so you don’t look like a dumbass making false accusation. Yes, lets vote out all those Democrats and Republicans who voted for all these bailouts. I’m all for that. FYI, Obama voted for the bailouts. Ron Paul a REPUBLICAN voted AGAINST the bailouts. So, using your logic, since you support Obama, you are rewarding criminals who rape the system at every opportunity.
[/quote]

Good point. Ron Paul does seem to have the most economically sensible policies. It’s too bad he’s not on the ballot in California. I may yet vote for Bob Barr as Ron Paul’s proxy. I will be voting against Democratic Representative Susan A. Davis because she voted for the bailout.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=asianautica]
People like me? Sorry to burst your bubble but I NEVER voted for Bush. I’m also not voting for McCain this year, just to get it out there so you don’t look like a dumbass making false accusation. Yes, lets vote out all those Democrats and Republicans who voted for all these bailouts. I’m all for that. FYI, Obama voted for the bailouts. Ron Paul a REPUBLICAN voted AGAINST the bailouts. So, using your logic, since you support Obama, you are rewarding criminals who rape the system at every opportunity.
[/quote]

Good point. Ron Paul does seem to have the most economically sensible policies. It’s too bad he’s not on the ballot in California. I may yet vote for Bob Barr as Ron Paul’s proxy. I will be voting against Democratic Representative Susan A. Davis because she voted for the bailout.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=asianautica]
People like me? Sorry to burst your bubble but I NEVER voted for Bush. I’m also not voting for McCain this year, just to get it out there so you don’t look like a dumbass making false accusation. Yes, lets vote out all those Democrats and Republicans who voted for all these bailouts. I’m all for that. FYI, Obama voted for the bailouts. Ron Paul a REPUBLICAN voted AGAINST the bailouts. So, using your logic, since you support Obama, you are rewarding criminals who rape the system at every opportunity.
[/quote]

Good point. Ron Paul does seem to have the most economically sensible policies. It’s too bad he’s not on the ballot in California. I may yet vote for Bob Barr as Ron Paul’s proxy. I will be voting against Democratic Representative Susan A. Davis because she voted for the bailout.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=asianautica]
People like me? Sorry to burst your bubble but I NEVER voted for Bush. I’m also not voting for McCain this year, just to get it out there so you don’t look like a dumbass making false accusation. Yes, lets vote out all those Democrats and Republicans who voted for all these bailouts. I’m all for that. FYI, Obama voted for the bailouts. Ron Paul a REPUBLICAN voted AGAINST the bailouts. So, using your logic, since you support Obama, you are rewarding criminals who rape the system at every opportunity.
[/quote]

Good point. Ron Paul does seem to have the most economically sensible policies. It’s too bad he’s not on the ballot in California. I may yet vote for Bob Barr as Ron Paul’s proxy. I will be voting against Democratic Representative Susan A. Davis because she voted for the bailout.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=asianautica]
If you want to reward work, then stop rewarding people who don’t work. Why would they work if they’re getting rewarding for not working? A guy who’s on welfare and who would get all these extra tax credit from Obama wouldn’t want to get off his ass and get a minimum wage job to end up w/ less than what he gets for doing nothing.[/quote]

How about we stop rewarding criminals like Bush has done with his $700 billion No Banker Left Behind Bailout? That, coupled with the $250 billion dollar direct taxpayer injection into the banks adds up to almost $1 trillion in welfare for the richest Americans (and even some foreigners).

This to me is despicable. Bush, Republicans, and people like you who vote for them are rewarding criminals who rape the system at every opportunity. I would much rather see a few thousand dollars in taxpayer money go to a family in need as opposed to over a trillion going to a criminal element of society who is also among the richest.

I guess we are different that way. You have no trouble giving over a trillion in taxpayer money to criminals, while I would prefer that taxpayer money be used to help with some of the social ills in this country.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=asianautica]
If you want to reward work, then stop rewarding people who don’t work. Why would they work if they’re getting rewarding for not working? A guy who’s on welfare and who would get all these extra tax credit from Obama wouldn’t want to get off his ass and get a minimum wage job to end up w/ less than what he gets for doing nothing.[/quote]

How about we stop rewarding criminals like Bush has done with his $700 billion No Banker Left Behind Bailout? That, coupled with the $250 billion dollar direct taxpayer injection into the banks adds up to almost $1 trillion in welfare for the richest Americans (and even some foreigners).

This to me is despicable. Bush, Republicans, and people like you who vote for them are rewarding criminals who rape the system at every opportunity. I would much rather see a few thousand dollars in taxpayer money go to a family in need as opposed to over a trillion going to a criminal element of society who is also among the richest.

I guess we are different that way. You have no trouble giving over a trillion in taxpayer money to criminals, while I would prefer that taxpayer money be used to help with some of the social ills in this country.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=asianautica]
If you want to reward work, then stop rewarding people who don’t work. Why would they work if they’re getting rewarding for not working? A guy who’s on welfare and who would get all these extra tax credit from Obama wouldn’t want to get off his ass and get a minimum wage job to end up w/ less than what he gets for doing nothing.[/quote]

How about we stop rewarding criminals like Bush has done with his $700 billion No Banker Left Behind Bailout? That, coupled with the $250 billion dollar direct taxpayer injection into the banks adds up to almost $1 trillion in welfare for the richest Americans (and even some foreigners).

This to me is despicable. Bush, Republicans, and people like you who vote for them are rewarding criminals who rape the system at every opportunity. I would much rather see a few thousand dollars in taxpayer money go to a family in need as opposed to over a trillion going to a criminal element of society who is also among the richest.

I guess we are different that way. You have no trouble giving over a trillion in taxpayer money to criminals, while I would prefer that taxpayer money be used to help with some of the social ills in this country.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=asianautica]
If you want to reward work, then stop rewarding people who don’t work. Why would they work if they’re getting rewarding for not working? A guy who’s on welfare and who would get all these extra tax credit from Obama wouldn’t want to get off his ass and get a minimum wage job to end up w/ less than what he gets for doing nothing.[/quote]

How about we stop rewarding criminals like Bush has done with his $700 billion No Banker Left Behind Bailout? That, coupled with the $250 billion dollar direct taxpayer injection into the banks adds up to almost $1 trillion in welfare for the richest Americans (and even some foreigners).

This to me is despicable. Bush, Republicans, and people like you who vote for them are rewarding criminals who rape the system at every opportunity. I would much rather see a few thousand dollars in taxpayer money go to a family in need as opposed to over a trillion going to a criminal element of society who is also among the richest.

I guess we are different that way. You have no trouble giving over a trillion in taxpayer money to criminals, while I would prefer that taxpayer money be used to help with some of the social ills in this country.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=asianautica]
If you want to reward work, then stop rewarding people who don’t work. Why would they work if they’re getting rewarding for not working? A guy who’s on welfare and who would get all these extra tax credit from Obama wouldn’t want to get off his ass and get a minimum wage job to end up w/ less than what he gets for doing nothing.[/quote]

How about we stop rewarding criminals like Bush has done with his $700 billion No Banker Left Behind Bailout? That, coupled with the $250 billion dollar direct taxpayer injection into the banks adds up to almost $1 trillion in welfare for the richest Americans (and even some foreigners).

This to me is despicable. Bush, Republicans, and people like you who vote for them are rewarding criminals who rape the system at every opportunity. I would much rather see a few thousand dollars in taxpayer money go to a family in need as opposed to over a trillion going to a criminal element of society who is also among the richest.

I guess we are different that way. You have no trouble giving over a trillion in taxpayer money to criminals, while I would prefer that taxpayer money be used to help with some of the social ills in this country.

[Author]

Posts