Question about the "bailout"...please clarify?

Question about the "bailout"...please clarify. I was discussing this with a friend today and he took exception to the fact that the $700 billion is being called a "bailout. " s assertion is that the government would be buying distressed assets at fire sale rates and if they played their cards right, both the government and the taxpayers might benefit when/if the economy then turns around.Is he on to something here?

Asked by HankMoody 39 months ago Similar questions: Question bailout clarify Politics & Law > Politics.

Doubtful The government plan is not to pay discounted market rates for this debt, but to pay a rate that will insure that the banks will stay in business. Could it all turn out good? Sure.... it is more likely that it will cost us a good percentage of the $700 billion spent to buy these bad debts.

BTW, it is a bailout. If you buy something that no one will buy at a rate intended not to make money but rather to save a business, it is a bailout.

No way, Jose Nope. The companies holding these junk loans have been trying for YEARS to sell them. The market has looked at them and shied away because they're so junky.

The market has already judged the present and future value of these loans and decided they're a poor buy. People with their own money in hand have carefully considered these offerings and decided to keep their cash. Now is it likely the govt is more correct in judging these loans as being worth what nobody else will pay?Sen.

Coleman and the prez and even Bill clinton have all offerered Pollyanna predictions that someday the govt will turn a profit on these loans. Talk is cheap, like free. But you don't see these millionaires rushing to put THEIR OWN MONEY into this supposedly golden investment opportunity.

Actions speak a whole lot louder than words, if you're listening. When it's not your money, and you're not going go hungry, and nobody can prosecute you, you're a whole lot less careful. It's no sweat to give away $700 billion when it's not your money!.

Interesting thought bail out is a term that fits it, And no matter what you heard, the people of hard working USA, are about to have to pay for every dime. At least the Government, they are going to open an investigation for all the big mortgage company's, again our tax dollars. The mortgage buy out, is for 300,000 lucky Americans, that will leave more than 1,000.000 losing their homes.So even bail out isn't a good term.

More like sell out by the government to all those that lose their home by the economy, and not by over buying what they could not afford to.

1 Heh...Let's put it this way. There's a trillion dollars on a table surrounded by 500 politicians. What do you think is going to happen to it?

Duh! .

Heh...Let's put it this way. There's a trillion dollars on a table surrounded by 500 politicians. What do you think is going to happen to it?

Duh!

2 The assets are of unknown worth, but the consensus of the market is that they are bad assets, not worth what we'll be paying for them. If the market felt that those assets were likely to be profitable, someone would have bought them. Heck, companies would be bidding against each other for them.

Instead, Paulson will be taking $700 billion of our dollars and giving them to the fabulously wealthy CEOs who got the economy into this mess in the first place. In exchange, we the taxpayers will gain "assets" that nobody wants. And that $700 billion isn't just coming out of tax dollars; that money isn't in the budget.

We'll be borrowing that money via T-bills, probably from the Chinese government - if they're willing to buy. They've shown signs of being less than interested in buying US T-bills, lately. So it won't just be $700 billion.It will be far more than that, because we'll be paying interest to the Chinese for the loan for decades.

Taxpayers will get some money back eventually; some of those bad assets doubtless have some worth which can be recovered when/if the economy recovers (although it will probably never be what it was, and much of the US financial infrastructure will be foreign-owned). We're not likely to actually ever see that money back, though.It will be diverted into some new sleazy plan to benefit the ruling class and politicians. Unless they eventually feel the need to give us a pittance, perhaps another "rebate check", to quiet down popular discontent.

Even so, it won't be a fraction of what we'll be paying out.It must be nice to be a financial-sector CEO. You can spend millions lobbying Congress to deregulate your industry, have your own lawyers actually write the bills that free you from all oversight, have your own "ex"-employees appointed to oversee your transactions...and then when the system comes crashing down because your reckless, crooked dealings fell under the weight of their sheer arrogance and stupidity, you can get Congress to stick the public (those poor stupid suckers) with the bill. Nice work, if you can get it.

Look, if it's not a bailout, if it's such a great business opportunity, why isn't ANYONE ELSE IN THE WORLD interesting in taking advantage of it? .

The assets are of unknown worth, but the consensus of the market is that they are bad assets, not worth what we'll be paying for them. If the market felt that those assets were likely to be profitable, someone would have bought them. Heck, companies would be bidding against each other for them.

Instead, Paulson will be taking $700 billion of our dollars and giving them to the fabulously wealthy CEOs who got the economy into this mess in the first place. In exchange, we the taxpayers will gain "assets" that nobody wants. And that $700 billion isn't just coming out of tax dollars; that money isn't in the budget.

We'll be borrowing that money via T-bills, probably from the Chinese government - if they're willing to buy. They've shown signs of being less than interested in buying US T-bills, lately. So it won't just be $700 billion.It will be far more than that, because we'll be paying interest to the Chinese for the loan for decades.

Taxpayers will get some money back eventually; some of those bad assets doubtless have some worth which can be recovered when/if the economy recovers (although it will probably never be what it was, and much of the US financial infrastructure will be foreign-owned). We're not likely to actually ever see that money back, though.It will be diverted into some new sleazy plan to benefit the ruling class and politicians. Unless they eventually feel the need to give us a pittance, perhaps another "rebate check", to quiet down popular discontent.

Even so, it won't be a fraction of what we'll be paying out.It must be nice to be a financial-sector CEO. You can spend millions lobbying Congress to deregulate your industry, have your own lawyers actually write the bills that free you from all oversight, have your own "ex"-employees appointed to oversee your transactions...and then when the system comes crashing down because your reckless, crooked dealings fell under the weight of their sheer arrogance and stupidity, you can get Congress to stick the public (those poor stupid suckers) with the bill. Nice work, if you can get it.

Look, if it's not a bailout, if it's such a great business opportunity, why isn't ANYONE ELSE IN THE WORLD interesting in taking advantage of it?

" "I sent a question to Politics & Law but it has not appeared in My Askville. Why? " "Does anyone here know enough about the business and politics of syndicated radio programming to answer this question?

" "What is a good question?" "What is the best way to find out who an email address belongs to? To clarify, what is the best freesearch engine to use" "what happened to being able to clarify your question and choosing topics? Is this askville now?

It really sucks! " "An FDIC question...please clarify (see details). " "An office politics question" "I guess I should clarify my question.Is there software available to the public that can date a scanned old photo?

I sent a question to Politics & Law but it has not appeared in My Askville. Why?

To clarify, what is the best freesearch engine to use.

An FDIC question...please clarify (see details).

I guess I should clarify my question. Is there software available to the public that can date a scanned old photo?

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.