Economy, Politics, and Sin(fest)...

[cat_77]

So the president is warning that, if we do not pass this huge bill to bail out big business, we're going to go into a recession.

Er, aren't we already in one? I mean, really, we've got inflation, job loss, people struggling to survive on the little they are making while the economy and some would argue society as a whole goes to crap. But the best way to make things better is to bail out companies against Federal laws, not to mention first try to sneak it by without approval, and charge every man, woman, and child roughly $3500.00 in taxes to do so? Why can't they take responsibility for themselves? Why can't they file Bankruptcy like literally hundreds of people are doing each week? Why do we need to fix their messes?

In a slightly more amusing take on the whole thing, check out Sinfest starting with Sunday's and scrolling through to today's, which is truly awesome.

Comments

[tejas.livejournal.com]

I don't have a problem with the idea of the government needing to step in and keep our economy from cratering any more than it already is. What *I* have a problem with is that the current plan (which *doesn't* look like it'll pass Congress, thank goodness), lack of oversight aside, will mainly just benefit the bastards who got us into this rather than the people who've been harmed by it.

The first step of the process should be to strip the boards and senior levels of management of the banks/corporations involved of every dime they have. Pump *that* in first. Then, revoke the corporate charters (and whatever the banking equivalent is) and put the organizations under government control (as was done during the depression - when the government stepped in then, it wasn't to save banks, it was to save the homeowners) and use strict regulation to get things back on a more even keel.

Then, we need to re-regulate the banking and finance industries, among others, because it's pretty much been proven that the current system isn't working.

In every case, the focus needs to be at the bottom of the chain, ie, the folks like us down at the bottom of the heap. *We're* the ones that drive the economy, not the jackasses in corporate board rooms. They just reap the rewards and *that* is the fundamental problem we're dealing with.

[cat-77.livejournal.com]

As someone who works for one of the banks not involved in this, I have to say the thought of the government stepping in and restructuring things scares the crap out of me. I put this up to two parts: My lack of confidence in the current administration, and the fact that there are plenty banks out there that haven't fucked things up this bad (or at all) that would be caught up in the whole shebang. These banks fucked up. These banks need to take the hit. Yes, it should start with their restructuring to payoff as much as they can, even if it involves the high-ranking execs being not so high-ranking any more. Yes, Bankruptcy on this scale would be extremely difficult and be a pain in the ass for multiple people while it gets settled, but it would be within the law and I really think they need to work within the existing frames before tearing them down and replacing them with kid gloves and daddy's trust fund.

Here in MN, our major airline filed Bky not so long ago. They came out, made a profit, and are now merging with another. It sucked for them while it happened. It sucked for the execs, the employees, the stocks, and the people who bought tickets and had flights reduced. However, it was within the laws and worked out after a rather short time period.

[tejas.livejournal.com]

I think the massive deregulation we've seen in recent years has had a horrible effect on our economy as a whole. I simply trust the government far more than I trust industry.

That said, I trust *this* administration about as much as I trust industry... come to think of it, the line between the two is far too narrow for my comfort. :-)

[cat-77.livejournal.com]

Frobes just put up an article (http://www.forbes.com/home/2008/09/23/bailout-paulson-congress-biz-beltway-cx_jz_bw_0923bailout.html) about this. (Skip the intro screen to get to the article.) Apparently, among other things, the Treasury department admitted they just chose the $700 billion number "as a data point" with no hard evidence to back it up. A counter proposal to the bill calls for execs of the failing companies to cut back on perks and for the Treasury dept to have an equity stake in the firms, but it is being pushed aside.

Sense make not. Head hurt now.