Bailout Pill Poison for Readers
Steve Pearlstein, the Post financial columnist, writes today that "Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson seems to have finally won the power and money he asked for to mount an unprecedented rescue of the financial system."
Pearlstein recently won a Pulitzer prize in large part because he fired highly accurate warning shots about the mortgage crisis long before it was called a crisis. He assumes this rescue package will be approved.
It is obvious, however, that many of our Readers Who Comment remain very angry with the whole idea. However, the tone of the comments has moderated some over the weekend and there is occasional if reluctant recognition that some kind of congressional action is required. Several suggest that legislation is an inappropriate answer for what is proposed and that a constitutional amendment is required. There is also one call for a return to the gold standard. Some beliefs are hard to shake.
We'll start with Aprogressiveindependent, who said, "No matter how many politicians and commentators try to justify this bailout, the fact is the vast majority of Americans who were not reckless in their spending, who did not buy homes they could not truly afford will pay... This will likely inhibit the next president and Congress from funding education, health care, public safety and infrastructure improvements at necessary levels..."
But LW22 wrote, "My Dad told me enough about the Great Depression that I don't want to experience anything like it. It seems as if there is enough in there for taxpayers and mortgage holders that we should support it. I just don't want to gamble that everything will fall apart if the banks all fail..."
AJAX2 said, "Congress does not have the power to transfer this much power to the Executive Branch, without amending the Constitution. This bailout of Wall Street robber barons is a massive restructuring or our government and financial systems that should not be made without modifying the Constitution..."
jdadson agreed, writing, "We want our Constitution back! Call your representatives and senators. Jam the phones. Jam the email boxes. Empty the fax machines. This must be stopped."
But b-elliott wrote, "There are times when you have to stop and start over. This is one of those times."
whiteagle38 noted that "Its a hell of a lot more than Herbert Hoover did after the crash in 1929 until 1933 when FDR took over. It's a start, regulation has always got to be part of the equation...It is a good thing wall street wasn't "taking care" of our social security monies!!!"
But fzdybel wrote, "Yes, the spoonful of sugar for the dipwads who bought houses they couldn't afford will make every renter in the nation delirious."
jheubusch warned, "Maybe we don't have any choice at this point to swallow this medicine, but future generations are going to be paying for this for a very long time..."
scientist1 asked, "Why no equity share for the taxpayer? This is still a ripoff and Democrats are stupid to vote for it. Republicans will use it against them for years to come."
kyprios928 said, "Mr. Pearstein... is so mellow towards the culpists of this unprecedended economic catasrophy.Why is it that he never speaks about punishing these thieves? It is always , from now on we shall do things differently, except that we shall always have the American tax payer pay."
Taylorsucram wrote, "...The value of the dollar has gone DOWN. I think all Americans should be required to read "The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire". HISTORY DOES REPEAT ITSELF. We just put the inevitable off until the next Administration."
syoung29 said succintly, "What the taxpayers want is CRIMINAL LIABILITY"
catweasel3 writing about the proposed compensation limit of $500,000 for some top corporate executives, said, "...That's nice, but that's still too high. The limit of their salary should have been $400,000. Why should greedy executives who are now begging for money from the gov't make more than the president?"
Craazyman wrote, "...good work to congress on this one, to at least get some moral hazard protections into this bailout -- i.e. executive pay limits, potential future corporate tax if the assets don't recover, etc. Enough blame to go around on this one, but maybe we'll all learn a big lesson here. "Don't trust financial engineers bearing gifts of innovation, and the lobbyists who tout them."..."
lindakinne said, "Too bad the government never painted a clear enough picture of the everyday consequences to Americans of not doing this bailout. If it had, and those outcomes were as dire as the Great Depression, more people might be willing to support this deal... if the plan succeeds, the people won't appreciate what's been avoided. And if it fails, no one will understand just how complex the situation was and how difficult to fix..."
ucantmakeitup wrote, "So if I'm having trouble paying my bills because I was legally issued a credit line that I couldn't afford to pay off, and a mortgage I was legally told I could afford, and a car loan I was legally qualified for and oops, I got sick and incurred outrageous medical bills that help keep me alive... Does this mean I can go to my government and they will bail me out if I promise to pay it all back with interest IF I get a job? Gee, what a great country we live in."
We'll close with afalty2, who said, "It appears to me that this law is not liked by anyone out there. This is a sign that it is a good law because it doesn't completely please everyone that it has affected. Everyone involved on Wall Street must "feel the pain" for their shenanigans."
All comments on this analysis are here.
Posted by: Robert James | September 30, 2008 9:47 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: George Johns | September 30, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: GalapagoLarry | September 30, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: This is not a joke | September 29, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: Dick | September 29, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: JohnQPubilc | September 29, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: Vattikutti | September 29, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: dmm | September 29, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: dmm | September 29, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: Raman Vig | September 29, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: Richard | September 29, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: gemma | September 29, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET FRAUD AGAINST AMERICA | September 29, 2008 10:40 AM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.