|
Title: [Politics/Econ-comics] $700B bailout is "cash for trash" Post by: gleek on September 22, 2008, 08:08:17 AM Link (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/opinion/22krugman.html?_r=1&em&oref=slogin)
This is what the American taxpayers are going to be thinking: Quote ...if the government is going to provide capital to financial firms, it should get what people who provide capital are entitled to — a share in ownership, so that all the gains if the rescue plan works don’t go to the people who made the mess in the first place. That’s what happened in the savings and loan crisis: the feds took over ownership of the bad banks, not just their bad assets. It’s also what happened with Fannie and Freddie. (And by the way, that rescue has done what it was supposed to. Mortgage interest rates have come down sharply since the federal takeover.) But this bailout plan looks more ominous than simply having the taxpayers eating the bad debt: Quote But Mr. Paulson insists that he wants a “clean” plan. “Clean,” in this context, means a taxpayer-financed bailout with no strings attached — no quid pro quo on the part of those being bailed out. Why is that a good thing? Add to this the fact that Mr. Paulson is also demanding dictatorial authority, plus immunity from review “by any court of law or any administrative agency,” and this adds up to an unacceptable proposal. And here's an opinion from Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/21/23752/9719) that pretty much predicts what Naomi Klein talks about in the Shock Doctrine. The opinion cites an op-ed piece from the NYT that makes the point clear: Quote The administration’s plan would allow the Treasury to hire staff members and engage outside firms to help manage its purchases. And officials said that the administration envisioned enlisting several outside firms to help run the effort to buy up mortgage-related assets. Is the Bush Administration using this financial crisis as another opportunity to apply the shock doctrine? Are going to have another *goshdarn* Blackwater guarding the henhouse on Wall Street? Title: Re: [Politics/Econ-comics] $700B bailout is "cash for trash" Post by: stroh on September 22, 2008, 11:50:42 AM That is a lucid, intelligent, well thought-out objection.
Title: Re: [Politics/Econ-comics] $700B bailout is "cash for trash" Post by: MFAWG on September 22, 2008, 10:54:21 PM You know, I would say the whole Naomi Klein 'Shock Doctrine' is just more (left) wingnut paranoia, except that I actually heard this on the Michael Medved show this afternoon:
Medved suggested to Ed Gillespie (former RNC Chairman and current 'Special Counsel to the POTUS) that we appoint a 'Financial Oversight Czar' to coordinate the regulatory agencies on Wall Street. Gillespies response: 'I don't know how we're going to get somebody to do that in Manhattan for 220,000 dollars a year' WTF? You can't get somebody competent to work in NYC for 3 times the median wage in NYC? |