"This bill would not have been agreed to had it not been for John McCain... This is a bipartisan accomplishment, a bipartisan success. And if people want to get something done in Washington, they just watch John McCain. He's been the guy whose name is at the top of major pieces of legislation for a long time."

-- Mitt Romney, NBC's Today show, 9/29/08

 

 

"What Senator McCain was able to do was to help bring all of the parties to the table, including the House Republicans, whose votes were needed to pass this"

-- Steve Schmidt, NBC's Meet the Press, 9/28/08

 

 

"We're optimistic that Senator McCain will bring House Republicans on board without driving other parties away, resulting in a successful deal for the American taxpayer."

-- McCain spokeswoman Kimmie Lipscomb, 9/26/08

 

Wow. I never new Andrea Mitchell is married to Greenspan.

 

 

And David Gregory's (NBC Chief White House Correspondent) wife was, not sure if she still works there, a very high ranking lawyer at...anyone....Fannie Mae.

so, how much damage does everyone think the markets will take if the government came out and said "no bailout. sorry guys. we're done debating it. "

 

?

 

so, how much damage does everyone think the markets will take if the government came out and said "no bailout. sorry guys. we're done debating it. "

 

?

Were getting a little indication of what that would be like today.

i don't see a deal getting done in the next couple of days. will be interesting to see what happens

Were getting a little indication of what that would be like today.

 

Yeah, pretty much. Stocks get blown apart, interest rates explode.

 

Next steps would be for lending to dry up and depression to set in.

Anybody got a couple extra grand laying around want to go half with me on a bank?

so, how much damage does everyone think the markets will take if the government came out and said "no bailout. sorry guys. we're done debating it. "

 

?

I think the current market correction would continue for a while, and the Fed would likely have to continue doing just as it's been doing, lending out capital. It's possible that at some point, the credit market would freeze up more than it has and people genuinely would stop lending, at which point the Fed would step in as it did in the 80's, seize a couple of the banks, and take over as the lender of last resort until the capital markets relaxed. It will be messy, a lot of banks will lose a lot of money, but eventually the bad loans that these banks wrote will be dealt with.

Anybody got a couple extra grand laying around want to go half with me on a bank?

I've got about $30 in my pocket right now, I'm totally game.

So if I have this correct, my choices here are:

 

1. Hope for a bailout, which basically would be a case of socialism to ease economic crisis, or

2. Hope for no bailout, which would cause Wall Street Armageddon.

 

Is death an option here?

CNBC is being told there will not be a second vote until Thursday at least.

They'll make some changes, hit it for a vote again tomorrow or Wed, and it will get passed this week. I'd bet on it.

 

And looking at the details of the bill, this is not what anyone could reasonably call socialism.

 

CNBC is being told there will not be a second vote until Thursday at least.

Eh, I thought Wednesday, but Thursday is fine. I still think it passes this week or at least passes one chamber and is near ready for the 2nd, at worst.

 

So if I have this correct, my choices here are:

 

1. Hope for a bailout, which basically would be a case of socialism to ease economic crisis, or

2. Hope for no bailout, which would cause Wall Street Armageddon.

 

Is death an option here?

There are more than a few very intelligent people who think that the bailout could do more damage than the no-bailout plan.

There are more than a few very intelligent people who think that the bailout could do more damage than the no-bailout plan.

True. But calling it socialism or some kind of clear disaster is way over the top, IMO.

 

Looking at the latest version, I'd call it 60 to 70% good stuff.

 

There are more than a few very intelligent people who think that the bailout could do more damage than the no-bailout plan.

As the first one was written, I'd agree. Can't comment on the second one because I don't know the details. It's pretty ugly, though and they have to do something now.

 

They'll make some changes, hit it for a vote again tomorrow or Wed, and it will get passed this week. I'd bet on it.

 

And looking at the details of the bill, this is not what anyone could reasonably call socialism.

The House Republicans have been screaming socialism on TV though. Although that is to be expected.

The House Republicans have been screaming socialism on TV though. Although that is to be expected.

Sure, and some Dems are screaming that its big business stomping on the little guys. All to be expected.

 

Sure, and some Dems are screaming that its big business stomping on the little guys. All to be expected.

The amazing thing is...I agree with both the Repubs and the Dems on this one. It is too much like socialized risks for my taste, and it's also big business dumping on the little guys.

The biggest one day point drop in the history of the Dow Jones industrial average was today.

I hear now that McCain is blaming Obama for not rallying his party.

I hear now that McCain is blaming Obama for not rallying his party.

 

They both can't win on this one, seriously.

 

The public doesn't want it, both parties are running hard for political cover. It's going to do no good for either guy to finger point at this point.

 

I hear now that McCain is blaming Obama for not rallying his party.

 

The party that voted 2/3 for the bill as opposed to his party that voted 1/3 for it?

The amazing thing is...I agree with both the Repubs and the Dems on this one. It is too much like socialized risks for my taste, and it's also big business dumping on the little guys.

It is socialized risk, and it is big business getting away with it. it is also, in its essence, necessary at this point in time. The alternative is worse.

 

The art here is to craft a bill that minimizes those two factors but still acts as the necessary stabilizer. Oh, and, follow on with laws to prevent this sort of mess in the future.

 

The party that voted 2/3 for the bill as opposed to his party that voted 1/3 for it?

But that 1/3 of the Dem party are running for cover. Come on, there's blame all over the place for this one.