Re: Re: Lawmakers reject bailout plan

[Guest guest]

Bailing it out is what would cause this to go on longer.

Take the bailout of GM and Ford. That bailout will let those companies hand on for a while longer, mostly to appease the unions before an election, but the American auto industry is being crushed by the union negotiated benefits and legacy costs. As it was, Toyota and other companies were beginning to buy up bits of the big three. If they failed, the assets would simply be bought up by other car makers who aren't burdened by the massive labor costs and would go on making more cars.

The same thing is happening in the financial markets. Bits and pieces of the failed companies are being bought up. What's happening is that the potentially profitable parts are being chipped away from the bad bits. Eventually this would leave all the bad debt out there which would be written off like so much bad debt already is. It would slow down the market for a while, but once it processes out, things will pick up again.

The problem is that we are bailing out the superrich at the expense of the majority. Those who caused this problem should have their wealth taken away and be tried in court. The politicians who set up this failure in an effort to buy votes and the ones who have recently allowed this to continue, should be putout of office and also tried. Never happen though.

What we really need to do is to go back to a kind of gold standard to balance the economy and rein in the ultra rich.

In a message dated 9/29/2008 6:07:05 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, no_reply writes:

Of course not. They will only create another plan. What I am hoping isthat there is NEVER a bailout plan and that all the folks who causedthese problems will have to sort it out for themselves. It will takelonger for an economic recovery, but it will be healthier thanextending this whole problem by inflating a deflating balloon again.AdministratorLooking for simple solutions to your real-life financial challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and calculators.

[Guest guest]

Some of them made a lot more than that. I think part of the bailout plan was to make them give up those assets. Of course, there was some really bad stuff in there. One point was that Wall Street would be given 5 years to "clean up it's act" or it would face taxes. Problem with that is that they would be taxing the people's money, the investments and such. They would not be taxing the CEO's salaries. There was also some kind of special tax on the CEO's based on their pay, but the company would also pay a matching amount. Neither of those would work because the CEO's would find a way to mitigate it while the other half would be paid by investors, so it would be another tax on the middle class.

Japan had a solution to that as do the Europeans, but I haven't had the time to look that up today.

I think if companies are bailed out they should have conditions placedin them, for example the CEO should not have a cushy $10 millionsalary while the company is sinking. I think more oversight is alsoneeded.Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and calculators.

[Guest guest]

I think if companies are bailed out they should have conditions placed

in them, for example the CEO should not have a cushy $10 million

salary while the company is sinking. I think more oversight is also

needed.