Comments on: Is Soaring Debt The Lesser Of Two Evils?

Some Economists Say Any Ill Effects Stemming From Massive Bailout Better Than The Alternative

[forever1973]

The Lesser of Two Evils???

Well, maybe the lesser EVIL would have been to manage the country properly in the first place, and avoid this situation.

[forever1973]

Whiny libs!

Bush has only doubled the national deficit. Well..triple at the most.

Have you forgotten that Clinton got a blowwjob?










--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Stormy0ne at 11:38 PM : Sep 20, 2008

Funny!

[txgrouch2006]

"To get the funds to buy up the bad mortgage loans that have threatened to bring the financial system to its knees, the government will have to borrow."

Hi. My name is Dubya. But my frends call me "Dub" for short.

I had 8 years to fix the mess that was left by the guy I replaced. But I spent the whole time playing with my tie and letting my friends shoot staples across the office until the carpet is full of staples.

Anyhoo, I needs to borry some money, cuz I messed up REEL BAD. I needs A LOT. I''m not sure how much, it could be up to $700 billion. But I''m hopin'' it''ll be less''n that.

So what do you say? I won''t be President much longer anyways, someone else will come after me and help clean things up.

[scallywag8]

China has one thing right. They execute these kind of people.

[scallywag8]

They just bend this country over and drive it as far as they can. Lets command our military to gather them up and feed them to lions.

[ubrew12]

Some Economists Say Any Ill Effects Stemming From Massive Bailout Better Than The Alternative

For 30 years, economists and others have been claiming that growing the debt is not as horrible an economic alternative as not growing it. Just once, I''d like someone to try paying down the debt, even by just $1 trillion, and SEE if thats true. Debt just means you are deferring a problem to the future. Why don''t we act, just once, as though the future is now and see if paying down the debt is as simple a thing as those economists claim it is.

There is an air of ''inevitability'' about growing the debt that scares me. Especially at $10 trillion, this should not be an easy choice.

[scallywag8]

I hope the day is coming that we stand up to these prixs and take OUR money back and throw them in the poor house. I think they should be exiled from this country. They are the real terrorists.

[occams_taser]

Over the last almost FOUR DECADES productivity has grown and the wealthy have gotten spectacularly much more wealthy, and WAGES ARE COMPLETELY STAGNANT.

Conservatism and laissez faire SIMPLY DOES NOT WORK FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF US.

There already IS a class war and most of us are LOSING. The two political parties don''t represent us, with the Democrats a tiny bit better every once in a while, but for the most part they both suck.

[occams_taser]

Over the last almost FOUR DECADES productivity has grown and the wealthy have gotten spectacularly much more wealthy, and WAGES ARE COMPLETELY STAGNANT.

Conservatism and laissez faire SIMPLY DOES NOT WORK FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF US.

There already IS a class war and most of us are LOSING. The two political parties don''t represent us, with the Democrats a tiny bit better every once in a while, but for the most part they both suck.

[strangeworld]

The wealthy no doubt think that the bailout is great - they can keep their money and continue to speculate in a stock market that''s been propped up with taxpayer money. Meanwhile the US workers/taxpayers who have to give for the bailout don''t have enough to keep playing this chumps market and fall farther behind. Republican greed is unbelievable.

[occams_taser]

Don''t forget they hired these same experts to tell how expensive the Iraq war crime was going to be.

[cbsblogger]

35 years of incompetent government starting with Reagan and his trickle down theory, lower taxes and higher deficits. Combine that with policies that give corporations tax breaks to outsource, and no enforcement of our borders and a Trillion dollar 6 year war in Iraq for absolutely nothing.

What really pxsses me off is we pay these bxstards to run us into the ground and sell our country out.

Debt 2001= 6 Trillion;
Debt 2008= 12 Trillion

[bigermay]

THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT BAIL OUTS PROVIDE THE "PAUSE WHICH REFRESHES". IT MAY WELL KEEP YOUR MONEY SAFE BUT THAT WILL BE MONEY WHICH LOSES VALUE!

HERE IS WHY: THE US DOLLAR IS FALLING. THAT MEANS HIGHER INTEREST RATES AND/OR INFLATION. IT WILL EVENTALLY MEAN THE ABANDONMENT OF THE US DOLLAR AS THE WORLD''S RESEREVE CURRENCY. THAT IS, THE WORLD IS TURNING AWAY FROM THE USA AND THAT MEANS DECLINE ACROSS THE BOARD FOR AMERICA.

NOW IS THE TIME TO GET RE-EDUCATED. NEITHER THE POLITICAL PEOPLE NOR THE THE FINANCIAL PEOPLE HAVE ANSWERS. THERE IS ONE UNUSUAL PLACE TO GO FOR THE CORRECT PATH FORWARD AND PROSPER FROM THE NEXT CRISIS COMING AT US- THE HOT WAR ENVIRONMENT WITH IRAN AND THE LONG PREDICTED CALIFORNIA EARTHQUAKE.

GET THE BASICS NOW AND THEN THE FINANCIAL TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS. THE BOOK ON AMAZON.COM IS "OUR NATION IS GOD" BY MENDEL EDWARDSON. GET THROUGH THIS SPIRITUAL AND POLITICAL REVELATION. THEN, ACT; GET STARTED NOW AND ONE WILL BE READY BEFORE THE NEXT TRAUMA WHICH COULD BE ONLY MONTHS AWAY.

[shortestfuse]

Republican hypocrisy - stay out of the free market government - let it correct itself. Yet when the big boys make some stupid investment decisions it''s a different story. Then it''s - Put up a TRILLION dollars of TAXPAYER money to help these guys so they don''t go bust. What about the rest of the country? What about the middle class? What about the fact that our grandchildren will be paying this debt off 50 years from now?

[shortestfuse]

Yes some people bought loans who couldn''t afford them - they they paid the consequence by losing their home. What are the consequences for the big banks? Nothing - they are bein bailed out at OUR expense. Looks like the consequences are only to the middle class CITIZENS of the U.S. - no one else

[pollroller1]

It''s such a wonderful day in the neighborhood. Can you say depression? Folks you ain''t seen nothing yet. Just wait until the soup lines and the tent cities arrive.

[nolalou]

The problem stems from people buying homes who cannot afford them, but were convinced by lenders to commit to variable rate mortgages, ultimately leading to foreclosures when they couldn''t pay increased interest rates.
I put the blame for this mess squarely where it belongs, on the Bush administration and the Republican Party! First, they are the party of deregulation, that allowed banks and lending institutions go unchecked with predatory lending practices, second it was a Bush policy to increase home ownership, especially among minorities! His policy created INCENTIVES to lenders to loan money to people without a down payment and with out the means to pay!!
This quote is from an article by Paul Krugman
"Owning a home lies at the heart of the American dream.%u201D So declared President Bush in 2002, introducing his %u201CHomeownership Challenge%u201D %u2014 a set of policy initiatives that were supposed to sharply increase homeownership, especially for minority groups."

[payasyougo]

Keep your eye on this one. Next there will be a wonderful plan by government to give these taxpayer bought houses to low income folks so they can live the dream of home ownership.

It will be more of the same from the Income Redistribution Service (IRS), the governments arm of vote buying.

[samthetvcat]

---"The federal government is going to have loans that aren''t repaid," Peter Morici, an economist at the University of Maryland, told CBS News. "That''s the American public, and in turn it will take possession of the houses and have to resell them."---

From a profit-making perspective, that''s like the ''best-case'' scenario isn''t it because then you don''t just have appreciation, you''ve also got rental income. But from a human perspective, the best-case scenario would be to renegotiate a bad loan so people can stay in their homes. And the Government''s obligated to put humanity first, aren''t they?

I still don''t understand whether the Government is even inheriting the mortgages themselves, or is it so down the chain they only have the mortgage-backed securities (?)

[samthetvcat]

---"It is the rapidly rising debt that is cause for concern. The government is already spending more than $400 billion a year just to pay interest on the national debt. The higher that debt goes, the higher the government''s borrowing costs and the less it has to spend on other programs."---

Is the idea still that you need to spend money to make money? But really the rule is that you need to be able to make more money than you''re spending for it to be worth your while, isn''t it?

I trust that the plan must be necessary if everybody''s saying it is. I just wish everybody would see curbing spending as equally necessary! :(