As much as I think the Dodd bill is a significant improvement over the Paulson power grab, and I do, it is missing a number of important things.
First, as Kay Hagan points out, the review portion seems to be missing teeth. If the review board doesn't like what the Secretary is doing, what can it do about it? Also, she's right that it needs to meet once a week, not once a month. This crisis is moving too fast for once a month.
Second, there doesn't seem to be any provision for paying for this beyond praying it'll eventually pay for itself. I don't see any good reason not to add in Bernie Sanders suggestion of a 10% surcharge tax on the Americans who earn over a million a year. They're the ones who benefited from the last 8 years, who benefited from the policies which caused this disaster, they're the ones who should pay to clean up the mess.
Next, the bill (Section 10) allows for insurance of money market funds but doesn't appear to require that if they fail anyway, they be taken over by the FDIC. This needs to be a bedrock principle, if you blow up your business, the government gets it, you don't get to keep it when in a free market you'd be bankrupt.
I also don't see any real re-regulation of the industry in this bill. That needs to occur, and it needs to be in the bill, because once Wall Street has their bailout they will fight against being properly regulated tooth and nail. This needs to include very strict rules not allowing the use of default insurance any more, getting rid of most different types of swaps, regulations limiting the use of securitization and limits on how debt in general can be sold. (In particular, debt should probably not be able to be sold more than once, and originators should be forced to keep at least half on their books to avoid them selling stuff they know is crap.)
Dodd needs to add an organization which has the right to regulate banks. This needs to be in badly.
Finally, while there is a claw back provision for executives who overstated earnings (that would be, oh, all of them) and the Secretary is allowed to set limits on executives of organizations which sell assets to the treasury, this is very much entirely at the Treasury's secretary's belief. That needs to be in there. As long as executives can pay themselves enough in a few years (heck, in one year) so that they never need to work again, they will have incentives to play games that cause disaster years down the line, while they make good now. Much of the current problem came from taking theoretical profits from years to come, and booking them as current profit. When those profits didn't happen, because the models were incorrect about what the future would hold, the system came crashing down. No system which does not limit executive compensation enough to make them need their job ten years from now, or twenty, will stop another such crisis from occuring.
Dodd's done a good job here, but there's more work to be done. I hope that Congress will put some more work into the bill to make sure it's a bill which won't just try to deal with the crisis now, but which will go a long way to making sure it doesn't happen again.
Login Here
Spotlight



Support this site!
Keep
up with news
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search


RSS/XML Feed
Aloha, Ian!
I think it’s missing what I proposed last night or the night before
we’re the ones bailing these companies out, not congress, not the president, not paulson
we need some stock options to go with this deal
ian, I asked ecahn downstairs how to impliment public ownership, she pointed out how convaluted that might be
there needs to be simple plan to give us ownership rights that we can put toward retirement if this works out
have any ideas how to impliment?
Ian, I amazed at your stamina not to mention your understanding of this whole mess. My hat’s off to you for all the great posts. Hope you are getting at least a little rest.
What kind of reregulation do you think we need for Wallstreet. I think hedgefunds should be regulated like banks, also shouldn’t we own these companies at full value.
Needs a provision to get current management retired and out of business, at least for a decade or two. Above all, we need to take managements’ balls and go home.
BTW, booking future profits as current income is illegal. The guilty might not always go to jail for it, but it guarantees steady trips to the courthouse for years on end.
I think the executives “parachute” needs to be limited to come metric off of the AVERAGE salaired person in their respective organization, I also think there should be NO reward, simply a retirement, they should NOT get rewarded for gambling my money away
I want the loans the government is giving out to be repaid at face value with interest even if the assets are sold for less.
I am hoping someone in the Obama camp lets the man know Ian would make a fine addition to his economic advisory committee
Great job, Ian. Sorry I missed the earlier thread. I sure hope we can get the additional features you mention, but I have to admit to just being thrilled that this bill even exists.
Here comes another test for Harry Reid. What will be the base bill he allows to be introduced first? Let’s hope that the rumors we’re hearing of Obama working behind the scenes to put this together are true and that Reid knows he has to fall in line on this one.
I forgot to say I like the small guy in the picture.
exactly right. we can not compromise on this.
my take on dodd’s bill is that it’s not as batshit crazy as paulson’s. but that’s not good enough.
and WTF is this?!?:
man, any guarantee needs to be heavily regulated investments, that’s for sure
That was a hilarious exchange between Pat and Rachel, poor ole Pat came up short… again! ;-)
I also don’t see any real re-regulation of the industry in this bill.
Ding!
Giving them the money to go out and do it all over again.
“And hey, hurry up, goddamn it. We’re outta dough over here!”
I’m just a bill.
Yes, I’m only a bill.
And I’m sitting here on Capitol Hill.
Well, it’s a long, long journey
To the capital city.
It’s a long, long wait
While I’m sitting in committee,
But I know I’ll be a law some day
At least I hope and pray that I will
But today I am still just a bill.
.
EPU:
Under Paulson, Goldman cashed in earnings of 5.6 billion in 2005…and he personally made 38 million that year.
Hellllooooo!!!
That’s who I want to be in sole control of the money….Heh, heh.
wtf are we talking about insuring money market funds for? that’s just the point - they’re not insured. that’s how banks and credit unions get saving account deposits (and cd’s and the like) - because they are insured.
insuring money market funds makes no sense, as far as i can tell.
1. it encourages people to take their money out of banks and credit unions. but the banks and credit unions need those deposits in order to have a base on which to make loans. like for mortgages!
2. money market funds don’t fund mortgages.
is dodd trying to kill the traditional local bank / credit union? and what’s left of the housing market?
or am i just thoroughly confused?
Ian, this is a ‘habit of omission’ by the dem’s. If you and others can see the loopholes in such legislation, why is it that such loppholes aren’t taken care of by the bill writers? Seems to occur again and again.
OT Rachel says the bomb in Pakistan used Aluminium powder Rachel did not say the words fuel air bomb but if it was thats a nuclear level blast with no radiation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermobaric_weapon
some more lovely bits - not.
the treasury sec. gets to do whatever he wants with no accountability? just a monthly “oversight” meeting by, get this a committee comprised of: the heads of the Fed, fdic, treas sec and 2 members appointed by congress. and they have no power to do anything other than meet.
we must consider the hypothesis that it’s a feature, not a bug.
could bernie sanders be encouraged to write an alternative bill?
Needs more revenue, I’d say.
And it needs to be named The Bush Levy. Make him a greater traitor to his class than FDR.
hey, you can keep picking out bits and pieces of the bill, but it’s going to be *really* hard to decide which is the worst, because each and every single clause is very, very bad.
Rachel should have pointed out that most of the loans were not to poor people. Rachel should have pointed out that hedge funds bought the loans at 20 to 1 and more leverage with loans from the banks.
So if the mortgage bankruptcy rate goes beyound the safety margin the banks budgeted for when they made the loans the banks losses come in at 20 to 1 or at whatever rate they loaned the money out at.
The GOP is lying and engaging in class warfare we need to Crucify these Monkeys!
you’re the lawyer.
our twolf posted this from WIRED earlier today
Hey Everyone!
Based on this http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/.....refer=home
And Frank’s ‘overstatement’ I find myself supporting the Republicans who don’t want a bailout. The idea that “Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Democrats have agreed that the rescue program, once passed by Congress, can begin while lawmakers create an oversight structure, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank said. Negotiations continue over new aid for homeowners trying to avoid foreclosure, he said. ” an oversight program can occur AFTER a ‘resue program’ is created is pure bovine excrement.
Repub Senator Lyda Green of Alaska, throwing Palins under the bus on Rachel’s show…delicious….
I’d rather restore the Eisenhower era marginal tax rates. 91% above 5 million, say.
And let’s restore the estate tax immediately instead of in 2 years.
this one, i think, will make it into my top five:
my bold.
Oh, you mean like Microsoft code.
it’s definitely what the wingers are pushing - “Dems gave money to the shiftless!”
did everyone see this ? they are trying to claim Dems did it with Community Recovery Act Money - not so much
* CRA loans constituted only 23% of all loans and 9.2% of high-cost loans.
* CRA loans were twice as likely to be retained in the originating bank’s portfolio than loans made by other institutions.
* CRA loans were less likely to be foreclosed upon than other loans.
link - pdf warning
Can you say, Coup D’Etat….
It looks like both of the candidates think the current bill is flawed, which puts the Administration in a bind. They can’t just ignore the repub candidate. And Obama puts the spine in the dems. Maybe this won’t totally suck, even though we don’t get to have a legislative process, and democracy, and we citizens don’t get input, and there won’t be any punishment for executives who screwed us.
From what I can tell, no one in America wants this BS bailout.
Ian,
I’ll throw this out for all to chew on:
Why isn’t the US Government making these financial institutions a “deal they can’t refuse”?
By that I mean the following:
Ok, we’ll offer between 1¢-5¢ on the dollar for each “bad mortgage”.
You folks don’t like our offer?
Then hold onto all those “bad mortgages” all by your lonesome.
And don’t try to pass off to us any of that worthless toilet paper like CDOs, SIVs, etc. You cooked up all that fantasy funny money crappola, you eat it!
We are only interested in buying “real” stuff; as in “real estate”.
Finally, ya’ll have 24 hours to condsider our offer.
You don’t like it? Cry me a fookin’ river!
that is funny as hell.
If it’s a real big FAE and a real small nuke, then the comparison might be valid, but in terms of what most people think of when you say “nuclear weapon”, well those are orders of magnitude more powerful than any conventional, even an FAE or thermobaric bomb.
Here, once again, is the sad truth and the reason why Paulson and Bushco will get what they want:
Cocktail parties in D.C.
They are all cronies…they drink, eat, invest, and sleep together.
That is the TRUTH.
How about tax to pay for Bush’s war and the Tax to pay for GOP deregulation?
But yes Bush needs to be named he needs to be tagged with blame.
here’s another great one, as jayt said, there’s just so many to choose from.
2 years? wtf?
How about a provision that if a mortgae is being sold below face value, the mortgage holder of a principal residence (owner occupied) gets right of first refusal to buy the mortgage (aka Refinance the mortgage)?
yep - nice catch on the “without limitation” language.
You might wanna look at the language in 2(b)(2) which follows what you cited.
That would be after “enter into contracts…. ->without regard to any other provision of law regarding public contracts.
kinda important.
Question Ian….
People today were asking when the beginning of the deregulation to open the door and then Reagan continued….. Do you think (I’m not going Ron Paul on this) when Nixon took our monetary system off the gold standard and then the the world pegged their currently to the dollar a part of the issue? And if they start pricing Oil in another currency going to impact the value of the dollar?
And I’d like to see a 50% asset tax on people owning over $1,000,000 per year….
Who appoints members of the Oversight Board?
The President appoints a couple of FED Board members now, and that doesn’t work out all that well.
The last thing we need in this deal is another fiscal rubber stamp.
Shock Doctrine Naomi let Andrew Sullivan get away with the same crap on Bill Maher’s show. Your facts were needed by Naomi and Rachel we need to get our people facts on issues.
The GOP is certainly giving their people lies to respond to the issues.
I have no problem with people owning something worth a lot. I have a problem with people stealing other people’s money. Someone who owns something worth 1 million does not mean they got it in a manipulative or illegal manner….
i missed that - what page was it?
If the Repugs insist on bailing out these “financial services institutions”, then Congress should pass legislation for a tax on Repugs, and only Repugs, to pay for it.
Shorter message to Repugs: “You want to buy that shiny thing over there? Then you pay for it sucker!”
Fuel Air bombs detonate the nitrogen in the air did this happen in Pakistan.
the follow up question when does this tech get to Iraq as a suicide truck bomb upgrade?
Shock Doctrine Naomi let Andrew Sullivan get away with the same crap on Bill Maher’s show.
In Naomi’s defense, when Andrew Sullivan gets off on a rant, no force as yet known to man can make him shut up….
(at least he has turned absolutely and completely away from the MCrazy candidacy).
Too bad Bill Maher didn’t just excuse him from the rest of the conversation after Sullivan’s making of that point.
I found the Pakistan bombing uncannily similar to Oklahoma.
i asked this on the last thread - but got no answer. maybe there is an answer here?
hell, at this point, i’d take a proposal from a little green martian. doesn’t have to be a dem, although that is my preference.
klein tore greenspan limb from limb when they debated last year.
didn’t get to see last night though, no cable tv.
We could make Alaska and all states red and blue revenue neutral as far as Federal spending goes, that would hurt the GOP much more than us. If the GOP complains we point out that we could have made it only red states.
A tax on the ultra rich, foreign companies, companies that outsource/relocate their corporate headquarters out of America to avoid taxes would be good too.
Plus lets see the GOP argue against that in this economy.
It seems to me that the Dems who are in the position of writing the legislation are going to protect their collective financial a**es.
i missed that - what page was it?
it’s the end of the clause you cited in your 31.
(2) entering into contracts, including contracts for services authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code;
First page.
Oh I could have shut Andrew up:)
I love Naomi I so wanted to hit Andrew for talking crap. But to be honest Naomi needed some more facts to put that dog down and she didn’t have them.
Or the UN headquarters in Baghdad.
Ding.
Hmmm…what is the common denominator? Who has the material?
Thanks Ian.
digg
They should just call the bailout, the Phil Gramm bailout debacle.
The Gramm-Rubins bailout.
Fuel air bombs are detonated in the air, not on the ground.
Thus, air bombs.
The black Helicopter crowd’s websites must be a must read for al Quieda. But I bet the feds are not tracking who reads their sites.
The Bush Attorney General for the area who declined to investigate possible links the would be Obama shooters had to the white power, black helicopter guys is telling.
Peaceful Hippie protesters at the GOP convention and eco terrorists are the true danger to America.
The Phil gramm/john McShame debacle recovery act
Here are two websites I found on the aluminum … it is used in fireworks and other products….. Alcoa sells it….
firework chemicals
Alcoa
Ian,
Thank you for all of your great, informative posts over the last few days. After reading, I feel like I understand what’s going on better than most of the talking heads on teevee.
But is there a way that you can distill what has happened over the last few years (and few days) down to something that any idiot Republican voter in say, Indiana, could understand?
Not a bumper sticker or a poster, but a few short paragraphs without lots of big words that people don’t understand.
Not an easy task, but I’d love to see you explain it to the masses.
thanks again!
Yeah, that’s the GOP talking points.
Ignore that the hedge funds created the “black affinity” marketing, because they were desperate for higher interest loans, so they could make more money. See page 146 of Charles R. Morris’ “THE TRILLION DOLLAR MELTDOWN,” for an excellent explanation.
McVeigh used agricultural fertilizer and fuel oil, in Iraq, they probably used explosives purloined from all the circa 1980s US-supplied arms caches. Don’t know about Pakistan. Truck bombs are terrible weapons and unfortunately relatively easy to assemble. The only defense is to keep vehicles away from buildings and that’s incredibly difficult in an urban setting.
oh, gotcha. thought there was something in addition to that - as if it wasn’t already bad enough.
and as you pointed out, it’s even worse than i thought.
once again, all i’m left with is a “wtf?” i wish dodd was here now, so we could ask all of our questions.
Bernie Sander’s outline of a proposal (not actual legislation)
Something I still don’t understand–why are all the Dem proposals, including Sander’s–asking for an equity stake? We should be getting first liens, not equity.
And why haven’t the Dems understood three key dynamics here?
1. They have a crisis, we (the taxpayers) have the money. If they want some of our money, we dictate the terms.
2. There are exactly two people who can single-handedly roadblock what happens here: Bush with a veto, and Pelosi through control of the House agenda. Pelosi is in a position to simply dictate what happens.
3. Republicans made this mess, so they should be forced to publicly clean it up. The price for cooperation with the White House should be that the GOP whips its people into line to vote for a good bill and all but the safest Dems get to vote against it (which is going to be the politically preferable thing to do even for a good bill.)
And a final question…why haven’t I seen Bernanke’s presentation last week to Congressional leaders in Pelosi’s office? If they want $15,000 from my family, they better tell me the full story.
excellent op-ed from david sirota today: The $700 Billion Questions
he asks questions:
From The Hill:
No one could have anticipated . . .
True, but the positioning of the truck and the magnitude of the explosion and the huge crater in the ground were similar. In OK, the front of the building was blown off, in Pakistan, the building caught fire. Also, btw, there were reports that the building might collapse. Not the same, but similar impact.
There is a fundamental flaw in the whole wall street casino system that none of this is addressing is. the entire system is only concerned with the next quarterly report. Decisions are not made based on the long term just what the next quarter will show and how much profit they will show
And to Phil Gramm, it is your time!
“No whine before its time.”
thanks for the sander’s link.
if you want to see the P&B’s show, tune in to cspan3 tomorrow morning. i posted the following earlier today:
There are things architects can do to help prevent collapse, basically by overbuilding, making sure that even if some vertical supports are lost, the load gets redistributed to to the ones which remain intact. Of course it raises the cost of building, so there will always be resistance from developers.
Dodd’s done a good job here, but there’s more work to be done. I hope that Congress will put some more work into the bill to make sure it’s a bill which won’t just try to deal with the crisis now, but which will go a long way to making sure it doesn’t happen again.
The fundamental problem is that it trusts the Secretary of Treasury to do things all by his ownsome. Most of the other problems could be fixed if you replaced ‘Secretary of the Treasury’ with a ‘Troubled Asset Committee’ which would be charged with doing all this stuff and which would consist of Paulson, Bernanke and three Democrats.
Second, I agree with the R’s about not kitchen sinking the bill for totally different reasons. It is difficult to craft good law and almost impossible to do so in a hurry. So if you KISS with the bill, you can concentrate on the things that are important to a bailout, namely, that the US get
goodexcellent terms for buying this crap, that the home owners get relief, and that as much of the crap derivative paper be destroyed as possible.The reason is, is if this doesn’t work, this is a Democratic bill. If it does work, it’s going to be a Bush bill. Fixing the system in such a way that McCain gets reelected (heh, freudian slip there) is certainly more dangerous than failing to fix the system. Fixing the system, and then later having it turn out that the wheels come off helps John McCain and results in the situation being the same as if you had done nothing.
So it seems to me you gotta limit the bill to stopping the rot properly and nothing else.
max
[’Or just forget it.’]
Wow. Very good
Thanks for the link! Though I’ll have to try to catch it later (And Hi! It’s been a while, I’ve been in China…)
I don’t want the sanitized dog-and-pony show. I want literally whatever slides they showed last week.
Bullseye. Thanks.
Bullseye. Thank you.
Love the part about the liens.
Apparently, Bank of America has done an analysis which shows that the biggest beneficiaries of any plan that is put in place will be…Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs.
Try not to act all surprised about that.
It’s good to be a friend of Hank’s.
howdy back!
hope you had a good trip.
i would also love to see the real slides. dodd was there, we should ask him. here’s what he said on sunday ABC:
i am surprised. forgot to take your still excellent advice about these being the days to release my inner cynic.
more on the same topic upstairs.
Until that money changes hands we are in the drivers seat. (If Pulson has it we are no longer in the drivers seat). There needs to be a favorable loan to value relation. Anticipating a fifteen percent reduction in value is not close to a realistic worst case scenario. Transparency is absolutely necessary and oversight should not be provided by anyone who is a devotee of the current economic paradigm
Hey, selise, just shut up and do what your betters tell you to do. NOT!
lol
I would add to this an interest rate. IIRC, AIG is paying something like eight points over Libor????
Perhaps this is because vast amounts of 401K’s, IRA’s and other pension moneys are wrapped up in mutual funds. Perhaps the way that this could be done would be to cap the insurance level per person, rather than per account. That way a multimillionaire wouldn’t be able to diversify their moneys into several funds…but would still have a basic “nest egg” protected…just like the rest of us. Maybe a $250-300K limit?
Tell ‘em to look at their stock portfolio for retirement…tell them to find much they have lost under the deregulated greed of Wall Street (esp. since the Clinton year Stock Market peak when the dollar was valued higher).
Unless they are only invested in Precious Metals and in Oil companies they have probably lost thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars.
LOL
poor babies
Sorry I missed everyone. Phone call with a friend who wanted to discuss this whole thing. May get him to post something tomorrow.
One further thing should be pointed out. This bill is a world better than Paulson’s, and it will help, but it is paying too much mortgages and in effect, it won’t work. It’ll just push the problem back a few months, maybe a year. This isn’t a “final” bailout bill in its current form. Not to say I necessarily think it shouldn’t be done, it’s sort of half a good bill, but don’t think this is “it”.
well, as far as i know that’s true of 401k’s but IRA’s can be bank CDs.
but again, won’t this do more harm than good to the mortgage market?
Dugg it for Ian!
Ian - I see you posted your clawback comments (I recognized the phrasing) at publicmarkup.org. Cool.
Everyone else: Sunlight Foundation has posted Paulson’s bill along with Dodd’s for markup and comment. (Sunlight’s proposed Transparency in Govt Act was up for comment from April through July of this year, and their staff has met with numerous Members of Congress on it since. They’ll do the same thing with these two bills, and more as they are proposed).
The oversight sections of both bills have gotten the most comments so far.
Great contribution and links, thanks.
And welcome, citizentools!
EPU territory, but maybe someone will see this important link:
it’s worse than anyone knew
Recommendation to Congress Not to Spread Financial Panic
Martin D. Weiss writes: The proposal before Congress for a $700 billion mega-bailout is far too little to repair the damaged debt and derivatives markets … and, at the same time, far too much for investors and taxpayers who must put up the money.
And this snippet:
“1,479 FDIC member banks are at risk of failure with total assets of $2.4 trillion.”
This is scarier than Nouriel Roubini!
Nationalize them.
Does anybody have that weapon besides us? If it was our guys, then it’s clearly an act of war against the Pakistani government and “we” were apparently trying to take out the head of government.
Lovely. sigh
“You want the Truth? You can’t handle the Truth.”
— Jack Nicholson in some dumb movie which just happened to be based
in Guantanamo Bay “Gitmo” where we now have problems related to the
movie’s story
That’s not entirely true. There are mortgages out there already and banks are tightening credit and there are things happening. So, to sit and wait is to let the existing dynamic to play out. That’s where “the presentation” scared everybody silly and demands some kind of quick effective action.
Congress shouldn’t authorize TOO much money because this has metastasized to the world and we don’t want to deprive others of the needed money for their own bailouts.
We must be frugal to the nth degree.
Becoming a nation of savers will take care of itself. If Japan is any indicator, saving will characterize the next decade.
All Nordic countries went through a depression in 1990-91, with Finland going so far as to see a systemic collapse of its banking system based on bad real estate lending. Norway had the best way, I think, of dealing with its mess. Everybody had to pay for the collapse to restart the system and everybody who paid in became a shareholder in the distressed companies. When the companies came back they were bought out and even got dividends.
Thus, any company wanting to be in the bailout has to surrender its shares to a government holding company. The repackaged shares would be reissued to every person who filed federal taxes in 2007. Every taxpayer would then pay in the bailout money as a subordinate loan to the asset management company, which would then deal with the debt. Over time, the investors would see part of their money returned as assets were realized. If Paulson needs $1 trillion, for example, then the average cost of a share per taxpayer would be about $7,000 or $14,000 per household. We know this is technically possible because we just saw Treasury implement the stimulus package.
Dodd’s bill is a lot closer to Paulson’s proposal than meets the eye. My take is that the Dodd plan does add two important features. It gives bankruptcy judges discretion to change mortgage terms, and does require equity contributions in return for purchases of troubled assets (although these should be as warrants, not shares of stock - maybe that’s what he means by contingency shares).
But, it also:
1) gives the Secretary of Treasury nearly total discretion
2) accepts all kinds of securities, not merely mortgage related
3) accepts toxic assets from foreign firms as well as domestic
And it also appears somewhat misleadingly to do other things, like:
1) provides review of actions, but only to make recommendations - to the Secretary
2) provides for GAO audits - but lets the Secretary certify them as not relevant
3) makes vague mention of help to homeowners, but no real requirements
4) restricts the time to December 2009, but allows the Secretary to extend it to 2 years
5) applies restrictions to executive compensation, but only in the very loosest of terms
6) requires openess of books, but only loosely and only to shareholders (implying not the public)
7) involves GAO - but mainly for studies
What I wonder is what does all of this (the Paulson and the Dodd proposals) have to do with the root cause of today’s problem, which is declining home prices?
I also wonder where we have the confidence (the above notwithstanding) that pouring money into banks will necessarily cause them to loan money.
I wonder who (besides businesses) wants to borrow money right now? (IOW, maybe the banks problem is that, because of the housing price drop, the bottom has fallen out of their mortgage-related business).
And I wonder that, if this is all a mistake, can we affort a $1 trillion dollar mistake?
I’m also deeply suspicious about the urgency of this, given the timing of the elections and the Congress. Many economists predicted what would happen - where were the regulators and the rest of the Bush administration?
Terry Steichen
Publisher/Editor, TopicCentral.com
PS: If you want a bit more detail on the Dodd versus the Paulson proposals (with McCain’s and Obama’s thrown in), check out this page: http://www.topiccentral.com/Wiki.jsp?page=Bailout