Have you guys been following?

[Lurker]

Using your ER example, the doctor wouldn't patch up the patient's surface wounds, sending him on his way while he's bleeding internally, either. We have to take time to carefully analyze the situation we're in. I disagree with Bush that we have to enact a solution RIGHT NOW without thinking things through. His bailout plan with no oversight or recourse is a non-starter in my opinion.

[Partha]

Everyone is so wrapped up in who's to blame...I'm more curious as to who's going to be the one to fix it. It took years and multiple bad ideas to get us to this point. All it'll take is one good idea and a few years to put us back on track. Show me the one, two, ten, whatever politicians that want to make a healthy stride to solving our issues, and I'll show the support those people are going to need and possibly deserve.

[Partha]

Using your ER example, the doctor wouldn't patch up the patient's surface wounds, sending him on his way while he's bleeding internally, either. We have to take time to carefully analyze the situation we're in. I disagree with Bush that we have to enact a solution RIGHT NOW without thinking things through. His bailout plan with no oversight or recourse is a non-starter in my opinion.

What, you mean trusting Bush's initial impulses is bad? Look at all the wonderful things it's done for us so far!

[Embar Angylwrath]

Using your ER example, the doctor wouldn't patch up the patient's surface wounds, sending him on his way while he's bleeding internally, either. We have to take time to carefully analyze the situation we're in. I disagree with Bush that we have to enact a solution RIGHT NOW without thinking things through. His bailout plan with no oversight or recourse is a non-starter in my opinion.

I agree that having a bailout plan without some level of oversight is ill advised. And even though you didn't state this, I want you to know that any company that is going to be "bailed out" should be left a shell of itself. It galls me to see the nationalization of our banking system (lets not kid ourselves here), but if the banking system was so poorly run that nationalization is the only option.. well... being the pragmatist that I am, I'll eat this shit hoagie, and hope we can do better.

[Kulaf]

Umm......the bill that everyone is saying caused this.....was passed with fairly bipartisan support:

The final bipartisan bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90-8-1 and in the House: 362-57-15

The problem lies not in the politicians....who like us rarely understand the total ramifications of what they are passing when it comes to something like this....but rather with the people doing the advising.

[Klast Brell]

Even Fox is reporting this. Albeit at the bottom of a long article.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,425924,00.html

Some parts of the proposed legislation released over the weekend are also worrisome. For example, at least in the first draft, the proposed power given to the Secretary of the Treasury would be unlimited and unchecked.

“Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.”

Oh that makes me feel secure. What could possibly go wrong?

[Harlowe]

Even Fox is reporting this. Albeit at the bottom of a long article.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,425924,00.html

Some parts of the proposed legislation released over the weekend are also worrisome. For example, at least in the first draft, the proposed power given to the Secretary of the Treasury would be unlimited and unchecked.

“Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.”

Oh that makes me feel secure. What could possibly go wrong?

When I read that I thought.....why is this buried, shouldn't people be going OH HELL NO about that part? I've seen a few small articles about it, but I think it deserve a big WTF front page.

[Ddrak]

It's impossible to solve the problem without figuring out the cause.

We know the cause - poor risk management in the face of high immediate profits. What is not relevant is who voted and signed what and who didn't. I couldn't give a flying fuck if it was FDR's sekrut time bomb because he was a closet commie who wanted to nationalize banking - the thing is to understand the *cause* without apportioning *blame* until you're done with a *fix*.

As soon as it goes partisan you're gonna have a crappy fix. We all know this, so why even head down the partisan path now?

When I read that I thought.....why is this buried, shouldn't people be going OH HELL NO about that part? I've seen a few small articles about it, but I think it deserve a big WTF front page.

I would be shocked if Congress can actually legislate oversight away like that. The USSC should chew that up and spit it out in a heartbeat. If Congress actually can legislate away the judicial branch, then your constitution is fucked.

Dd

[Kulaf]

Correct me if I am wrong here.....but the Fed Chariman already operates like this. Basically they are saying that once appointed.....the Sec Treasury cannot be influenced by politics. Not a bad thing. He can still be removed from office. But acting in the capacity of Sec Treasury his actions cannot be reviewed or questioned.

[Harlowe]

He's never been given a blank check to spend.

[Ddrak]

The Fed Chairman (and the rest of the board) are restricted in that they cannot spend money that isn't already profit from the Fed itself. Cutting a blank check from taxpayer money with no oversight is an entirely different scenario.

Dd

[Lurker]

We know the cause - poor risk management in the face of high immediate profits.

I don't think it's unreasonable to point out two pieces of deregulation legislation that enabled the bad practices and directly led to the meltdown.

RANT RANT RANT ... why even head down the partisan path now?

Why head down that path? Because this is Brell Rants... or have I completely lost the plot?

[Ddrak]

Why head down that path? Because this is Brell Rants... or have I completely lost the plot?

Oh, here's not so bad. I'm saying the elected representatives should be spending more time searching for a fix than searching for a scapegoat.

I mean seriously, wtf is this:

“Just because God created the world in seven days doesn’t mean we have to pass this bill in seven days,” said Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas.

Dd

[Embar Angylwrath]

Here's Joe Biden in his interview with Couric...

"When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed," Biden told Couric. "He said, 'Look, here's what happened.'"

errr...

1. No television in 1929, television sets didn't become widely available to the masses until about 1950 or so. Also, no television networks in 1929.
2. FDR wasn't president until 1933. Hoover was in office at the time of the stock market crash.

[Harlowe]

FDR certainly was coming out and talking to the people about the market crash & depression, but probably radio as opposed to tv. Because he was hitting the bankers and financiers right from the beginning, hell his inagural address.

I think he just mispoke about tv vs. radio.

Beginning with his inauguration address, Roosevelt began blaming the economic crisis on bankers and financiers, the quest for profit, and the self-interest basis of capitalism:

Primarily this is because rulers of the exchange of mankind's goods have failed through their own stubbornness and their own incompetence, have admitted their failure, and have abdicated. Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men. True they have tried, but their efforts have been cast in the pattern of an outworn tradition. Faced by failure of credit they have proposed only the lending of more money. Stripped of the lure of profit by which to induce our people to follow their false leadership, they have resorted to exhortations, pleading tearfully for restored confidence....The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization. We may now restore that temple to the ancient truths. The measure of the restoration lies in the extent to which we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit.

Because that absolutely resonnates with what is going on right now.

Personally I think Joe Biden is a gaffe-machine though.

[Kulaf]

Wouldn't fly today. If people back then knew his background.....that he lived the life of privlidge I don't think it would have flown then either. But people didn't know.

[Partha]

Don't you guys routinely claim that the rich will have a moral imperative to take care of the poor of this nation, and that's why we shouldn't have welfare?

[Ddrak]

Don't you guys routinely claim that the rich will have a moral imperative to take care of the poor of this nation, and that's why we shouldn't have welfare?

Isn't that the argument FOR welfare?

Dd

[Ariannda Kusanagi]

That seems a bit snarky there Dd. First of all it's no one's responsibility to take care of anyone but their own, second the welfare system itself is also in bad need of reform and overhaul. And I don't see how the remark was supporting welfare, it seems it was simply a comment, although nothing with Partha is really ever that cut and dry.

There's nothing wrong with assisting those people that are falling on hard times, there's a problem when people abuse the system, and any system thats in place will be abused by some, there by destroying it for the people that could really use it and have no intention of taking advantage of the situation.

[Partha]

Don't you guys routinely claim that the rich will have a moral imperative to take care of the poor of this nation, and that's why we shouldn't have welfare?

Isn't that the argument FOR welfare?

Dd

I think Dd is using the Australian slang form of the words, 'take care of'.