Friday, September 26, 2008
Screw The Bailout
I've avoided writing about the Wall Street Bailout because much of the early analysis of this issue has been kneejerk. I try to avoid kneejerk reactionism because rather than it being intelligent evaluation of any issue, kneejerkism is an emotional reaction rather than one based on facts and data. Liberals and Progressives are famous for their kneejerk reactionism, they wouldn't know a fact if it fell on their head like a ton of bricks. Enough time has passed for the worms to come crawling out from the can on this matter, giving this mess the chance to be scrutinized objectively.
Barack Hussein Obama, Junior supports the bailout. What's interesting about this is that very few Liberal bloggers are writing anything critical of him for supporting this bailout. Their bent is based on pure politics. Their unwavering and unquestioning support - their complete blind allegiance to Obama - prevents them from treating him as they would a Republican advocating support for this bailout. President George W. Bush and Obama both favor the bailout. The Obama Cultists call this bailout just another tactic of Bush supporting his wealthy Wall Street friends while not applying the same criticism to Obama and applying the same standard to him. Big surprise?...NOT!
Nanny Pelosi supports the bailout. Obama supports the bailout. Harry ReidTard supports the bailout. Barney Frank supports it. ChrisDodd Dudd supports it. These reasons alone should be enough to be against it.
As this financial mess continued unfolding, it became more clear to me that taxpayers should not be on the hook for "those too big to fail." If these institutions grew too big and took too many risks and find themselves on the brink of extinction, so be it. That Barack Hussein Obama, Junior favors the bailout tells me there's something inherently wrong with it.
Why should Main Street bail out Wall Street? Treasury Secretary Henry "Hank" Paulson wants American taxpayers to pony up $700 Billion with basically no strings attached? Is there anyone out there who thinks that $700 Billion will permanently fix this? Is there anyone out there who thinks that $700 Billion will be the final solution to this mess?
Under mostly Democrat politicians, banks were coerced into writing mortgages for people who were woefully under-qualified to repay these loans. Oversight and regulation - under both Democrats and Republicans - of investment firms were ignored. Does anyone want to tell me how Sarbanes-Oxley prevented failures and book-cooking? Sarbanes-Oxley was merely a band aid slapped on a severed limb.
Take Detroit automakers Ford, GM and Chrysler. How is it that their business in foreign markets is very profitable, yet in the U.S. they're asking for help from the Federal Government? They're over-regulated to death by environmental restrictions. Remove the restrictions and the 30-some boutique fuel standards that their products are required to meet and they won't need a bailout.
Screw 'em, let those "too big to fail" fail. I understand the repercussions could be horrific and result in financial crisis similar to the Great Depression. But then again, maybe it won't. Maybe we need another Great Depression - more like a Great Reorganization - in order to reform the U.S. Federal Government, returning it to a lean, mean machine instead of the bloated, pork-spending, regulating everything but the industries that it should be regulating monolith into which it has morphed.
I could be wrong, but a $700 Billion infusion seems to do nothing but postpone the inevitable of the bubble bursting. Sometimes things have to get worse before they get better. This is one of those times.
We've entered into a Bear Market, not a shock to anyone who's been paying attention. I am no expert by any means, but anyone thinking a Bull Market would continue uninterrupted doesn't know much about the Market.
We are told that 100 banks are set to fail. So let them fail. Let 'em. Cluck Schumer didn't have a problem pushing IndyMac into failure, so why is he pretending and feigning to care and be concerned now?
Both parties have failed the Middle Class, the Democrats far more culpable and liable than the Republicans. Obama's answer is increasing taxes for everyone. John McCain's answer is naming Andrew Cuomo as the Treasury Secretary when it is Cuomo's own hands that are all over this mess.
The Wall Street mess is a Democrat Scandal that makes Enron look like a minor accounting error at a lemonade stand.
I've had it with political incumbents, both Democrat and Republican. If I had my way, not one single incumbent would be re-elected. Not one. Take a lesson from what Caligula did in Rome. Populate the U.S. Senate with horses. How much worse could it be?
This bailout hinges on one, single, two-letter word: "If". If this bailout works it renders moot a tax increase. If.
Is there anyone out there who believes that any surplus or windfall "if" this bailout works won't be spent by the Democrats? Give me a break.
Economic experts are divided on "if" the bailout will be successful, negligible or a complete failure. Paulson is unable to say with any degree of certainty that this bailout will work. We're supposed to cross our fingers and Hope for the best Change. What a crock.
This will not be the end of the Bailout Mentality from the Federal Government. Another institution down the road will once again be deemed, "too big to fail" and we will be chewing our food a second time. Bet on it.
©2008
Barack Hussein Obama, Junior supports the bailout. What's interesting about this is that very few Liberal bloggers are writing anything critical of him for supporting this bailout. Their bent is based on pure politics. Their unwavering and unquestioning support - their complete blind allegiance to Obama - prevents them from treating him as they would a Republican advocating support for this bailout. President George W. Bush and Obama both favor the bailout. The Obama Cultists call this bailout just another tactic of Bush supporting his wealthy Wall Street friends while not applying the same criticism to Obama and applying the same standard to him. Big surprise?...NOT!
Nanny Pelosi supports the bailout. Obama supports the bailout. Harry ReidTard supports the bailout. Barney Frank supports it. Chris
As this financial mess continued unfolding, it became more clear to me that taxpayers should not be on the hook for "those too big to fail." If these institutions grew too big and took too many risks and find themselves on the brink of extinction, so be it. That Barack Hussein Obama, Junior favors the bailout tells me there's something inherently wrong with it.
Why should Main Street bail out Wall Street? Treasury Secretary Henry "Hank" Paulson wants American taxpayers to pony up $700 Billion with basically no strings attached? Is there anyone out there who thinks that $700 Billion will permanently fix this? Is there anyone out there who thinks that $700 Billion will be the final solution to this mess?
Under mostly Democrat politicians, banks were coerced into writing mortgages for people who were woefully under-qualified to repay these loans. Oversight and regulation - under both Democrats and Republicans - of investment firms were ignored. Does anyone want to tell me how Sarbanes-Oxley prevented failures and book-cooking? Sarbanes-Oxley was merely a band aid slapped on a severed limb.
Take Detroit automakers Ford, GM and Chrysler. How is it that their business in foreign markets is very profitable, yet in the U.S. they're asking for help from the Federal Government? They're over-regulated to death by environmental restrictions. Remove the restrictions and the 30-some boutique fuel standards that their products are required to meet and they won't need a bailout.
I could be wrong, but a $700 Billion infusion seems to do nothing but postpone the inevitable of the bubble bursting. Sometimes things have to get worse before they get better. This is one of those times.
We've entered into a Bear Market, not a shock to anyone who's been paying attention. I am no expert by any means, but anyone thinking a Bull Market would continue uninterrupted doesn't know much about the Market.
We are told that 100 banks are set to fail. So let them fail. Let 'em. Cluck Schumer didn't have a problem pushing IndyMac into failure, so why is he pretending and feigning to care and be concerned now?
Both parties have failed the Middle Class, the Democrats far more culpable and liable than the Republicans. Obama's answer is increasing taxes for everyone. John McCain's answer is naming Andrew Cuomo as the Treasury Secretary when it is Cuomo's own hands that are all over this mess.
The Wall Street mess is a Democrat Scandal that makes Enron look like a minor accounting error at a lemonade stand.
I've had it with political incumbents, both Democrat and Republican. If I had my way, not one single incumbent would be re-elected. Not one. Take a lesson from what Caligula did in Rome. Populate the U.S. Senate with horses. How much worse could it be?
This bailout hinges on one, single, two-letter word: "If". If this bailout works it renders moot a tax increase. If.
Is there anyone out there who believes that any surplus or windfall "if" this bailout works won't be spent by the Democrats? Give me a break.
Economic experts are divided on "if" the bailout will be successful, negligible or a complete failure. Paulson is unable to say with any degree of certainty that this bailout will work. We're supposed to cross our fingers and Hope for the best Change. What a crock.
This will not be the end of the Bailout Mentality from the Federal Government. Another institution down the road will once again be deemed, "too big to fail" and we will be chewing our food a second time. Bet on it.
©2008
Labels: Biden, Cluck, Full Circle Liberalism, McCain, Osama Obama
Comments:
<< Home
Hi David,
Just saw your post after creating my first blog ever. I agree that this bailout is a bunch of BS for the taxpayer and I'm glad to see someone else who is thinking independently.
Vic
screwthebailout.blogspot.com
Just saw your post after creating my first blog ever. I agree that this bailout is a bunch of BS for the taxpayer and I'm glad to see someone else who is thinking independently.
Vic
screwthebailout.blogspot.com
Thanks for visiting and commenting Vic.
Can I expect large sums of royalty money from you, considering the name of your blog? ;-)
Post a Comment
Can I expect large sums of royalty money from you, considering the name of your blog? ;-)
<< Home
Alabama Internet
accordance and compliance with Fair Use Section 107 U.S. Copyright Code.
All other images and content © 2005-2009 David Drake.
Not responsible for content contained at linked sites.
Policy on commenting:
- Anonymous comments have little chance of being published.
- Comments made on posts 60 days old or older have little chance of being published.
- Published comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this blog author.
- Discretion of publishing or rejecting submitted comments rests solely with the owner and creator of this blog.
- Comments that egregiously "plug" (i.e. advertise or promote) another site or blog will be rejected. This doesn't mean you cannot include a link to your story, blog or to another site, but don't go overboard.
- Profanity is not a disqualifying factor, but profane rants solely for purposes of profanity are unlikely to be published.
- The owner and creator of this blog is not liable or responsible for the opinions of those who comment.
