So, how will America vote now?

GDB2222

Generali wrote: »

You could start a new banking system for that sort of money and let the current one go to the wall.

What sort of lead time would you need for designing the systems for a new banking system? 5 years,say? In which case, how are you going to manage in the meantime?

Generali

GDB2222 wrote: »

What sort of lead time would you need for designing the systems for a new banking system? 5 years,say? In which case, how are you going to manage in the meantime?

The infrastructure is already in place and available to be bought quite cheaply as the equity holders of Northern Rock found out.

Realy

Generali wrote: »

You could start a new banking system for that sort of money and let the current one go to the wall.

But could the US go it alone as no one would ever deal with them again!

beaujolais-nouveau

mr_magoo wrote: »

This $700B is no more than a bail out of the buddies on Wall Street, their using fear to sell the deal. From 3 pages it has gone to over 400 pages in days.
Any legal person will tell you 400 pages of law needs to be looked over very carefully because loopholes will be exploited.
Using fear to get this passed is wrong, the world didn’t end these last few days and I don’t expect it to end anytime soon either. Not many in Main Street really believes this is going to solve the mess their in.
The big one is the derivatives bubble now at approx $700 Trillion. Warren Buffett warned about this several months ago. If that goes, well, nothing could be ruled out.l

Here's how the bail-out could actually make things worse.

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/10/02/16605/the-paulson-plan-ponzi-scheme/

See especially the comment posted at 13:48, from which this is an excerpt:

The proposed legislation rewards the outrageously poor, if not outright corrupt, financial management of the banking industry. Banks that knowingly failed to be diligent about risk management and some that participated in fraud will be bailed out. Indeed, the mismanagement of major banks is systemic and has metastasized the illness in the housing industry into a global financial cancer. It needs to be cauterized, not subsidized.

The proposed legislation will ultimately leave the US taxpayer with hundreds of billions of dollars in losses added to the national debt and our taxes. To make any sense at all in achieving its intended goal, Treasury will have to pay a premium for this toxic financial waste. The taxpayer will ultimately eat this waste no matter what warrants, equity, or other arrangements are introduced.

Realy

beaujolais-nouveau wrote: »

Here's how the bail-out could actually make things worse.


See especially the comment posted at 13:48, from which this is an excerpt:

All very well I agree (we all know what the banks did but this is more about the people than the banks I think) but what about the American on the street does he want the debt and the possibility of something possibly stopping the financial train wreck.
Or the guarantee of financial disaster , mass unenployment and god knows what else!

penguine

Realy wrote: »

All very well I agree (we all know what the banks did but this is more about the people than the banks I think) but what about the American on the street does he want the debt and the possibility of something possibly stopping the financial train wreck.
Or the guarantee of financial disaster , mass unenployment and god knows what else!

My feeling is the bill will probably get passed in the House this time. First round of nay-saying can then be seen as a protest vote, when stomping for re-election they can say they listened to the voters but in the end did what had to be done.

GDB2222

penguine wrote: »

My feeling is the bill will probably get passed in the House this time. First round of nay-saying can then be seen as a protest vote, when stomping for re-election they can say they listened to the voters but in the end did what had to be done.

I thought the same, but I've been spooked by the fall in US equity prices today. Maybe it's just the economic data, as the punsters say.

beaujolais-nouveau

GDB2222 wrote: »

I thought the same, but I've been spooked by the fall in US equity prices today. Maybe it's just the economic data, as the punsters say.

Republican group wants bailout cut to $250 billion
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE4917ZE20081002?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews&rpc=22&sp=true

penguine

Sounds like the actual amount is irrelevant, it's just a starting figure as they will approve more as and when needed. Easier to disguise from the voters how much money it comes to.

Realy

beaujolais-nouveau wrote: »

Republican group wants bailout cut to $250 billion
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE4917ZE20081002?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews&rpc=22&sp=true

Only 12 of 74 need to turn to pass it.
Joe public is now telling the republicans the serious implications and want it to go through.
As said it was posturing on election last time. If they vote against again this time they can kiss good bye to their seat.