Comments on: Where Did The Bailout Billions Really Go?

CBS Evening News Exclusive: Were Bank Bailout Winners And Losers Cherry-Picked?

[demsts]

So the bailout has turned out to be another giant Bush/Cheney/Paulson PONZI benefitting their banking chums.
Smaller banks are destroyed and homeowners get NO help.
Congress failed to restrict the money and ludicrously trusted Bush.
That Congress would be dumb enough to trust Bush is beyond belief.
And Paulson says it is all too difficult to keep track of who got the money and refuses to give details.
The American taxpayer = the world''s biggest chump.

[wvu74621]

The money went through the company into the pockets of Demon-crats.

[marcosis78]

Just shows how incredibly greedy American companies are. If these companies doesnt have ''hearts'' why should we shoow any towards them?

[robert7562]

I guess if what makes it wrong is the fact that IF we really just can''''t afford it, then aren''''t the powerful but noble maybe just showing that they''''re willing to blow a trillion dollars of other peoples'''' money to avoid confronting a reality that forces them into an indentity crisis?.....Posted by SamTheTVCat

Yes, and it sounds like "let them eat cake"... and we all (well, some of us) know how that turned out...

..Hopefully the bailout will work! But if not, hopefully we don''''t let these people in power just keep pouring more multibillion dollar spending down the drain just because we can''''t stop them..Posted by SamTheTVCat

Yes, no matter how much I agree or disagree with "policy", I want OUR COUNTRY to prosper. I think the execution of the bailout was totally misguided, however, since it is already in place, I truly hope it works. It does no good for the USA to fail. It is going to cause pain, no matter which path we end up taking. I just hope and pray we don''t have to go thru too many different "plans" before we get it straightened out.

[samthetvcat]

pt 1

---"The pompus inability of the govt to admit they were wrong or mistaken . . . we are doomed to repeat this very same situation."---
Posted by robert7562

Ooh, ouch LOL - I think the problem might be with the economists because the ones who have risen to the level of governmental advisor are the ones who have devoted their entire lifes'' work to expounding on the merits of free trade . . . to admit the mistake then becomes tantamount to requiring them to admit that not only has their contribution to society not been beneficial, it''s actually RESPONSIBLE getting us to the point where we find ourselves now. That''s a really tough situation there :(

And then there''s the whole thing of like some of them are so nice and kind-hearted and well-meaning, and they want to give stuff to people like how Barney Frank wanted to empower people by expanding home ownership. Free trade was supposed to be about empowering the third world, and this bailout is supposed to be about creating jobs - I guess the thinking is that if it''s so right, how could it be so wrong (?)

[samthetvcat]

pt 2

I guess if what makes it wrong is the fact that IF we really just can''t afford it, then aren''t the powerful but noble maybe just showing that they''re willing to blow a trillion dollars of other peoples'' money to avoid confronting a reality that forces them into an indentity crisis? It''s not that much different from Bernie Madoff in a sense . ..

If the powers that be were really and truly so big of heart, I wish they''d see that yeah if you were to ask people most would rather see them eat crow if that''s what makes us better off then to try and buy our affections (?)

Hopefully the bailout will work! But if not, hopefully we don''t let these people in power just keep pouring more multibillion dollar spending down the drain just because we can''t stop them :(

[nynestor]

If the folks that got these "bailouts" were smart, that money is converted into non-dollar denominated assets. Some are just hording it or putting it in treasuries until the final collapse.

But the "bailout" wasn''t about money. Yes, it was a lot of money but did not put a dent on the actual amount of the losses incurred by the big investment houses and banks in derivates.

The total amount is something like 54 trillion! So no, the bailout was about bank consolidation in the face of imminent financial collapse of the US and the dollar. Burried in the "bailout" package are regulations that protect fat cat banks and bankers. That was the only reason to put it together and pass it as an "emergency."

[robert7562]

If it''s good for the country,good for the PEOPLE, I DON"T CARE if they are Rep, Dem, Lib or pink with purple polka dots. IT''S OUR COUNTRY at stake here.

[robert7562]

thx Sam
..being able to accept the humiliation that comes with having to publicly admit you''''re wrong and then having the flexibility to adapt a new course....posted by Sam The TVCat
I fear that this is yet another "brick in the wall" on our road to self destruction:The pompus inability of the govt to admit they were wrong or mistaken. I don''t want an apology from them, we ALL make mistakes. But I am growing weary of their attitude of My way or the highway because we KNOW what is best for YOU, seems a bit nazi like, at the VERY LEAST a Dictatorship. If I wanted that, I could go to Putin. Congress, the Senate and the Executive Branch have sat on their pedistol, The Hill, for far too long. After 237+ yrs the human factor has distorted what the founding fathers meant for the gov''t to be. That being: PUT THE PEOPLE AND THE COUNTRY FIRST, serve the PEOPLE, not their own personal interests or their personal ideas of what the USA "should" be or their pockets or bank accounts. For this reason I truly think that we need not only a house cleaning but a total renewal of who represents the PEOPLE. Simply (not so simply) removing existing politicians and replacing them with those in the wings will not do it, because the next generation politicians have only what they have seen to use for experience, which will only lead to a repeat of what is happening now. It might repeat quickly or may take a few years but without total housecleaning we are doomed to repeat this very same situation.

[entropod]

"They destroyed with reckless abandon, and then plead for mercy."
SearingTruth

A Future of the Brave

[ubrew12]

hal0bend said: "Only the pitchfork and guillotine can solve this matters at this point. "

The pitchfork and guillotine never solved anything. They destroyed French civil control until a greater pitchfork (Napoleon) came along, and then he destroyed Europe.

Of course, one of my favorite quotes is from Mao Tse Tung, who was asked, ''what do you think of the French Revolution?'' and answered ''I''ll tell you when its over''.

Doesn''t matter. He was a butcher. Gotta solve this by means other than pitchforks, thats all.

[hal0bend]

The situation grows increasingly pathetic. I don''t know how much more black and white the public and our so-called representatives need to see whats going on here.

The whole entirety of the federal government is corrupt and incompetent and the only real solution is to core out the entire disgusting complex through revolution. In reality, the financial disaster that is happening is natures way of sloughing off the parasites that have become embedded in our system. The federal government, sensing its immediate demise rushed to rob future generations of their wealth in order to prop up a failed system.

A system that will fail anyways.

Representative government has long since been discarded into the toiled. Our leaders only answer to their corporate masters. Only the pitchfork and guillotine can solve this matters at this point.

[samthetvcat]

PPS Like if Barack''s stimulus program actually works - awesome! (to quote Shrub)

But if it doesn''t work, six months from now or whatever, we''re going to be in the same place now, asking where all the money went because there''s been some shifting around of funds that have resulted in changes, but in the big picture doesn''t have anything else to show for the investment, aren''t we?

[samthetvcat]

PS Like for Congress'' model to work it''s the same old same old - don''t incomes need to be collectively higher for us to be able to afford the outsourcing relationship we have with China?

Only it''s even worse now than it was 8 years ago - not only has manufacturing been obliterated, so has banking and housing/construction.

Basically the underlying hypothesis of the Barack plan is the gamble that free trade is the ideal and that he''s going to make it feasible by having green jobs replace not just manufacturing in terms of its ability to provide equivalent income levels, and it''s going to also be sufficient to replace all the phony banking jobs that deregulation created but which weren''t actually providing a legitimate and sustainable product (?)

I think if his team comes back after the money''s been spent and they try to claim that they''re idea''s still valid but that they just didn''t get enough money to make a go of their capital venture, maybe the measure of assessment ought to be whether the venture that was promised to be sufficient to sustain the idea of free trade was ever feasible in the first place . . .

It may not just be about the trillions (?)

[entropod]

Indeed.

We were "Bushed".

But we are soon to be "Obamad"

But not to worry, it''s the exact same thing.
ST


"Poverty is the worst form of violence."
Mohandas Gandhi

A Future of the Brave

[lemonskink]

Once again, put Bush and all of these cohorts on him in leg irons, and put them on the USS Bush in a cell, they are never to touch US soil again. Ever. A Man without a Country.

[samthetvcat]

---"We are not producing anywere near the amount we consume (or import), the net result being that we are bleeding ourselves dry."---
Posted by robert7562

I get the sense that Congress thinks they''re smarter than the rest of us - but it''s always seemed to me that a lot in life isn''t about smarts after a certain point. Like after a certain point maybe it becomes more about listening to people and understanding their point of view even if they''re ideologically across the spectrum especially if there are a substantial number of people who subscribe to that view, taking ownership of past actions and being able to accept the humiliation that comes with having to publicly admit you''re wrong and then having the flexibility to adapt a new course, having the stomach to admit that you don''t necessarily have control over all the factors that are impacting the outcome, etc (?)

The red flag that maybe it''s Congress that has something else at play here is the confusing directive - for banks are they supposed to be acting more responsibly by not handing out such risky loans or are they supposed to be lending out more money even though we''re collectively greater risks now? for individuals are we supposed to be acting more responsibly by collectively not taking on so much debt or are we supposed to be trying to get loans so we can go shopping?

Robert, you''re input/output model adds up nicely - Congress'' model doesn''t seem to fare so well (?)

[inventagod2]

America - you have been NeoConned.

Again.

Dopes.

[patronejohn]

"Told You So." -Karl Marx

[ubrew12]

Banks need taxpayer funding to buy up other banks. Its how the free market works. You just wouldn''t understand it, if I explained it to you.

In any case, it makes it easier when the remaining banks come for your home. Ya see, they will no longer be insolvent...