Obama and dems threaten rescue plans

[kaydee457 13]

In essence "Obama's Plan" calls for:

- International Participation in bailout of WS (fat chance that the Chinese are going to pay for our rotten mortgage paper- naive) as he calls this an "international crisis".

- Caps on CEO's pay and pay outs (anti-capitalist, and probably not legal as many have contracts- it's a fact of life)

- money to bail out homeowners overextended- Sure this is a great idea....have me pay for the idiot in the next town I couldn't afford to live in pay for his home that he couldn't, and shouldn't have bought in the first place! Reward him with a bigger house, worth more in future, by having him pay what I pay for my smaller house so as to reward his mistake, poor fellow!

- a few more socialist suggestions made by him I cannot remember- feel free to add to this thread any others you've seen.....

Of course, as usual, "the one" spoke in vagaries as to how all this would work.....

As usual, the democrats I fear are going to be no more than obstructionists in this very important endevour....

[luckytxn 2,265]

It will get passed. They are just gonna add a few things.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It's called a comprehensive approach which is what is needed. A kneejerk reaction that doesn't do anything to address the root of the problem, doesn't encompass the global scale of the crisis and doesn't ensure that our tax dollars do not get diverted into multi-million dollar payouts to those that presided over the mess as it was in the making would be nothing but another corporate welfare program rewarding the very irresponsibility of the financial sector that has gotten us to this very point. How dare a candidate for the Presidency come up with a comprehensive approach?

A Statement of Principles for the Treasury Proposal from Senator Barack Obama

Chicago, IL | September 21, 2008

Chicago, IL -- "The era of greed and irresponsibility on Wall Street and in Washington has led to a financial crisis as profound as any we have faced since the Great Depression.

"But regardless of how we got here, the circumstances we face require decisive action because the jobs, savings, and economic security of millions of Americans are now at risk.

"We must work quickly in a bipartisan fashion to resolve this crisis and restore our financial sector so capital is flowing again and we can avert an even broader economic catastrophe. We also should recognize that economic recovery requires that we act, not just to address the crisis on Wall Street, but also the crisis on Main Street and around kitchen tables across America.

"But thus far, the Administration has only offered a concept with a staggering price tag, not a plan.

"Even if the Treasury recovers some or most of its investment over time, this initial outlay of up to $700 billion is sobering. And in return for their support, the American people must be assured that the deal reflects some basic principles.

* No blank check. If we grant the Treasury broad authority to address the immediate crisis, we must insist on independent accountability and oversight. Given the breach of trust we have seen and the magnitude of the taxpayer money involved, there can be no blank check.

* Rescue requires mutual responsibility. As taxpayers are asked to take extraordinary steps to protect our financial system, it is only appropriate to expect those institutions that benefit to help protect American homeowners and the American economy. We cannot underwrite continued irresponsibility, where CEOs cash in and our regulators look the other way. We cannot abet and reward the unconscionable practices that triggered this crisis. We have to end them.

* Taxpayers should be protected. This should not be a handout to Wall Street. It should be structured in a way that maximizes the ability of taxpayers to recoup their investment. Going forward, we need to make sure that the institutions that benefit from financial insurance also bear the cost of that insurance.

* Help homeowners stay in their homes. This crisis started with homeowners and they bear the brunt of the nearly unprecedented collapse in housing prices. We cannot have a plan for Wall Street banks that does not help homeowners stay in their homes and help distressed communities.

*

* A global response. As I said on Friday, this is a global financial crisis and it requires a global solution. The United States must lead, but we must also insist that other nations, who have a huge stake in the outcome, join us in helping to secure the financial markets.

* Main Street, not just Wall Street. The American people need to know that we feel as great a sense of urgency about the emergency on Main Street as we do the emergency on Wall Street. That is why I call on Senator McCain, President Bush, Republicans and Democrats to join me in supporting an emergency economic plan for working families - a plan that would help folks cope with rising gas and food prices, save one million jobs through rebuilding our schools and roads, help states and cities avoid painful budget cuts and tax increases, help homeowners stay in their homes, and provide retooling assistance to help ensure that the fuel-efficient cars of the future are built in America.

* Build a regulatory structure for the 21st Century. While there is not time in a week to remake our regulatory structure to prevent abuses in the future, we should commit ourselves to the kind of reforms I have been advocating for several years. We need new rules of the road for the 21st Century economy, together with the means and willingness to enforce them.

"The bottom line is that we must change the economic policies that led us down this dangerous path in the first place. For the last eight years, we've had an "on your own-anything goes" philosophy in Washington and on Wall Street that lavished tax cuts on the wealthy and big corporations; that viewed even common-sense regulation and oversight as unwise and unnecessary; and that shredded consumer protections and loosened the rules of the road. Ordinary Americans are now paying the price. The events of this week have rendered a final verdict on that failed philosophy, and it is a philosophy I will end as President of the United States," said Senator Barack Obama.

[kaydee457 13]

It's called a comprehensive approach which is what is needed. A kneejerk reaction that doesn't do anything to address the root of the problem, doesn't encompass the global scale of the crisis and doesn't ensure that our tax dollars do not get diverted into multi-million dollar payouts to those that presided over the mess as it was in the making would be nothing but another corporate welfare program rewarding the very irresponsibility of the financial sector that has gotten us to this very point. How dare a candidate for the Presidency come up with a comprehensive approach?

A Statement of Principles for the Treasury Proposal from Senator Barack Obama

Chicago, IL | September 21, 2008

Chicago, IL -- "The era of greed and irresponsibility on Wall Street and in Washington has led to a financial crisis as profound as any we have faced since the Great Depression.

"But regardless of how we got here, the circumstances we face require decisive action because the jobs, savings, and economic security of millions of Americans are now at risk.

"We must work quickly in a bipartisan fashion to resolve this crisis and restore our financial sector so capital is flowing again and we can avert an even broader economic catastrophe. We also should recognize that economic recovery requires that we act, not just to address the crisis on Wall Street, but also the crisis on Main Street and around kitchen tables across America.

"But thus far, the Administration has only offered a concept with a staggering price tag, not a plan.

"Even if the Treasury recovers some or most of its investment over time, this initial outlay of up to $700 billion is sobering. And in return for their support, the American people must be assured that the deal reflects some basic principles.

* No blank check. If we grant the Treasury broad authority to address the immediate crisis, we must insist on independent accountability and oversight. Given the breach of trust we have seen and the magnitude of the taxpayer money involved, there can be no blank check.

* Rescue requires mutual responsibility. As taxpayers are asked to take extraordinary steps to protect our financial system, it is only appropriate to expect those institutions that benefit to help protect American homeowners and the American economy. We cannot underwrite continued irresponsibility, where CEOs cash in and our regulators look the other way. We cannot abet and reward the unconscionable practices that triggered this crisis. We have to end them.

* Taxpayers should be protected. This should not be a handout to Wall Street. It should be structured in a way that maximizes the ability of taxpayers to recoup their investment. Going forward, we need to make sure that the institutions that benefit from financial insurance also bear the cost of that insurance.

* Help homeowners stay in their homes. This crisis started with homeowners and they bear the brunt of the nearly unprecedented collapse in housing prices. We cannot have a plan for Wall Street banks that does not help homeowners stay in their homes and help distressed communities. *

* A global response. As I said on Friday, this is a global financial crisis and it requires a global solution. The United States must lead, but we must also insist that other nations, who have a huge stake in the outcome, join us in helping to secure the financial markets.

* Main Street, not just Wall Street. The American people need to know that we feel as great a sense of urgency about the emergency on Main Street as we do the emergency on Wall Street. That is why I call on Senator McCain, President Bush, Republicans and Democrats to join me in supporting an emergency economic plan for working families - a plan that would help folks cope with rising gas and food prices, save one million jobs through rebuilding our schools and roads, help states and cities avoid painful budget cuts and tax increases, help homeowners stay in their homes, and provide retooling assistance to help ensure that the fuel-efficient cars of the future are built in America.

* Build a regulatory structure for the 21st Century. While there is not time in a week to remake our regulatory structure to prevent abuses in the future, we should commit ourselves to the kind of reforms I have been advocating for several years. We need new rules of the road for the 21st Century economy, together with the means and willingness to enforce them.

"The bottom line is that we must change the economic policies that led us down this dangerous path in the first place. For the last eight years, we've had an "on your own-anything goes" philosophy in Washington and on Wall Street that lavished tax cuts on the wealthy and big corporations; that viewed even common-sense regulation and oversight as unwise and unnecessary; and that shredded consumer protections and loosened the rules of the road. Ordinary Americans are now paying the price. The events of this week have rendered a final verdict on that failed philosophy, and it is a philosophy I will end as President of the United States," said Senator Barack Obama.

Yes, comprehensive but not from him....Once again he says what's intuitively obvious but then rambles on in generalities....

Well firstly, he criticizes the administration for not offering up a plan but he himself later says that this can't be done in a week.

His proposed give away to homeowners that are over extended defies logic and rewards those that haven't lived up to their own personal responsibilities. They are not "victims" but rather many, many people that simply overextended themselves, and many more that should never have been given these loans to start with. That's something the democrats have been openly promoting for years BTW.

Why now I'm kicking myself in the ####### for not having bought a house that I couldn't afford. You'd pick up the difference.

A "Global Response"......Sure, the rest of the world is going to forgive our debt. They're going to help cover the costs of all those bad mortgages and help U.S. Homeowners stay in their homes, because as Obama says about taxes, it's the "neighborly thing to do".....NAIVE........This is our problem, period! The rest of the world looks to us to fix it.....

Ah, "the ONE" has called on Main St., McCain, and Bush to join HIM, you know, "THE ONE".......geez, what freek'n ego!

The bottom line is that Obama's "Plan" amounts to no more than a speech given in hindsight to the weeks events and is vague and is nothing more than a simple bullet list of what everyone else has been saying for the past week. Another way of simply voting PRESENT…….

PLAN, this is not "PLAN".......

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In essence "Obama's Plan" calls for:

- International Participation in bailout of WS (fat chance that the Chinese are going to pay for our rotten mortgage paper- naive) as he calls this an "international crisis".

- Caps on CEO's pay and pay outs (anti-capitalist, and probably not legal as many have contracts- it's a fact of life)

- money to bail out homeowners overextended- Sure this is a great idea....have me pay for the idiot in the next town I couldn't afford to live in pay for his home that he couldn't, and shouldn't have bought in the first place! Reward him with a bigger house, worth more in future, by having him pay what I pay for my smaller house so as to reward his mistake, poor fellow!

- a few more socialist suggestions made by him I cannot remember- feel free to add to this thread any others you've seen.....

Of course, as usual, "the one" spoke in vagaries as to how all this would work.....

As usual, the democrats I fear are going to be no more than obstructionists in this very important endevour....

McSame has now signed onto the anti capitalist concept of CEO pay caps that you criticized Obama for promoting. The old man is slow to get behind common sense approaches (such as the taxpayer not funding lavish packages for failed executives) but at least, it seems, he's catching up and getting behind the right approach. Doesn't make him a leader, though.

On the issue of CEO compensation, McCain said no CEO of a corporation bailed out by the government should "be making more money than the highest paid government official."

"We can't have taxpayers footing the bill for bloated golden parachutes like we see in the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy," McCain said. "My friends, the top executives are asking for $2-and-a-half billion in bonuses after they ran the company into the ground."

[HAL 9000 96]

Lehman Brothers' execs are still available for upwards of 25 million dollars each independent of how the company does. Under the current bailout.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

His proposed give away to homeowners that are over extended defies logic and rewards those that haven't lived up to their own personal responsibilities. They are not "victims" but rather many, many people that simply overextended themselves, and many more that should never have been given these loans to start with. That's something the democrats have been openly promoting for years BTW.

Why now I'm kicking myself in the ####### for not having bought a house that I couldn't afford. You'd pick up the difference.

I agree with this 100%.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Lehman Brothers' execs are still available for upwards of 25 million dollars each independent of how the company does. Under the current bailout.

And that is just wrong. The company failed and they shouldn't see squat. If the taxpayer bails any of these firms out, the executives are going to have to tighten the belt. Running a company into the ground ought not to earn anyone multi-million dollar compensation packages.

[HAL 9000 96]

Lehman Brothers' execs are still available for upwards of 25 million dollars each independent of how the company does. Under the current bailout.

And that is just wrong. The company failed and they shouldn't see squat. If the taxpayer bails any of these firms out, the executives are going to have to tighten the belt. Running a company into the ground ought not to earn anyone multi-million dollar compensation packages.

Yep.

[Peikko 1,575]

It seems disingenuous to me to lay the blame entirly on people for taking up loans that were highly dubious to start with and should never have been offered. Yes, it behoves anyone to take responsibility for their actions but isn't at least part of the responsibility on those who created a loan system that was a house of cards? I personally believe that a level or regulation is required. We accept regulation in manufacturing industries. A manufacturer is not allowed to knowingly create and sell a product that will cause harm. Why shouldn't the financial industry be regulated in a similar fashion particularly when the knock on effects harm people who have been diligent with their borrowing and lending just the same as those who have been feckless?

[IAMX 3,055]

Lehman Brothers' execs are still available for upwards of 25 million dollars each independent of how the company does. Under the current bailout.

And that is just wrong. The company failed and they shouldn't see squat. If the taxpayer bails any of these firms out, the executives are going to have to tighten the belt. Running a company into the ground ought not to earn anyone multi-million dollar compensation packages.

Funny that kaydee is whining about government bailouts done by Republicans and you're complaining about the company shouldn't get squat, which is usually the Republican viewpoint.

Wonder where logic went in the switch.

The answer is -- it went away -- these answers are purely politically driven.

That means Republicans will go for socialism now because the Republican platform will. And they call others sheep.

Edited September 22, 2008 by SRVT

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Lehman Brothers' execs are still available for upwards of 25 million dollars each independent of how the company does. Under the current bailout.

And that is just wrong. The company failed and they shouldn't see squat. If the taxpayer bails any of these firms out, the executives are going to have to tighten the belt. Running a company into the ground ought not to earn anyone multi-million dollar compensation packages.

Funny that kaydee is whining about government bailouts done by Republicans and you're complaining about the company shouldn't get squat, which is usually the Republican viewpoint.

Wonder where logic went in the switch.

The answer is -- it went away -- these answers are purely politically driven.

That means Republicans will go for socialism now because the Republican platform will. And they call others sheep.

I'm not saying the companies shouldn't get squat - I am saying the folks that ran the companies into the ground shouldn't get squat. A viewpoint I have long held - long before this financial clusterfcuk we're looking at today. No switch here.

[Dan J 277]

It seems disingenuous to me to lay the blame entirly on people for taking up loans that were highly dubious to start with and should never have been offered. Yes, it behoves anyone to take responsibility for their actions but isn't at least part of the responsibility on those who created a loan system that was a house of cards? I personally believe that a level or regulation is required. We accept regulation in manufacturing industries. A manufacturer is not allowed to knowingly create and sell a product that will cause harm. Why shouldn't the financial industry be regulated in a similar fashion particularly when the knock on effects harm people who have been diligent with their borrowing and lending just the same as those who have been feckless?

Right, there is not one type of borrower, and some are truly victims of fraud or deceptive sales tactics.

Those who took the risk and over extended themselves should not get much in the way of bailout. Other than possibly making it easier to renegotiate the terms of their mortgage with the bank.

Others were subject to fraud or other deceptive practices might be eligible for aid. But it would be preferable that this be funded by money recovered from those perpetrating the fraud. Though that might be difficult.

No help should be give to any house bought beyond the primary residence.

But the mortgage crisis is not all about homeowners. Builders and investors (including investment banks) are left holding property or mortgages that are no longer good or worth what was paid for them. This is what is threatening the banking system stability, and homeowners are not really to blame. Banks and investors took on mortgages without doing their due diligence. On this end, no aid should be given, without strings attached. If we are to be responsible for the poor decisions of banks or investors, than we must attach conditions which reduce the likely hood that we find ourselves in a similar situation in the future.

[kaydee457 13]

In essence "Obama's Plan" calls for:

- International Participation in bailout of WS (fat chance that the Chinese are going to pay for our rotten mortgage paper- naive) as he calls this an "international crisis".

- Caps on CEO's pay and pay outs (anti-capitalist, and probably not legal as many have contracts- it's a fact of life)

- money to bail out homeowners overextended- Sure this is a great idea....have me pay for the idiot in the next town I couldn't afford to live in pay for his home that he couldn't, and shouldn't have bought in the first place! Reward him with a bigger house, worth more in future, by having him pay what I pay for my smaller house so as to reward his mistake, poor fellow!

- a few more socialist suggestions made by him I cannot remember- feel free to add to this thread any others you've seen.....

Of course, as usual, "the one" spoke in vagaries as to how all this would work.....

As usual, the democrats I fear are going to be no more than obstructionists in this very important endevour....

McSame has now signed onto the anti capitalist concept of CEO pay caps that you criticized Obama for promoting. The old man is slow to get behind common sense approaches (such as the taxpayer not funding lavish packages for failed executives) but at least, it seems, he's catching up and getting behind the right approach. Doesn't make him a leader, though.

On the issue of CEO compensation, McCain said no CEO of a corporation bailed out by the government should "be making more money than the highest paid government official."

"We can't have taxpayers footing the bill for bloated golden parachutes like we see in the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy," McCain said. "My friends, the top executives are asking for $2-and-a-half billion in bonuses after they ran the company into the ground."

Well, what he's saying is that if we, the taxpayers, own the company then they'll not be compensated more than the highest paid government officials.......

Seems reasonable to me as they're now essentially working for us, under the supervision of Washington.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In essence "Obama's Plan" calls for:

- International Participation in bailout of WS (fat chance that the Chinese are going to pay for our rotten mortgage paper- naive) as he calls this an "international crisis".

- Caps on CEO's pay and pay outs (anti-capitalist, and probably not legal as many have contracts- it's a fact of life)

- money to bail out homeowners overextended- Sure this is a great idea....have me pay for the idiot in the next town I couldn't afford to live in pay for his home that he couldn't, and shouldn't have bought in the first place! Reward him with a bigger house, worth more in future, by having him pay what I pay for my smaller house so as to reward his mistake, poor fellow!

- a few more socialist suggestions made by him I cannot remember- feel free to add to this thread any others you've seen.....

Of course, as usual, "the one" spoke in vagaries as to how all this would work.....

As usual, the democrats I fear are going to be no more than obstructionists in this very important endevour....

McSame has now signed onto the anti capitalist concept of CEO pay caps that you criticized Obama for promoting. The old man is slow to get behind common sense approaches (such as the taxpayer not funding lavish packages for failed executives) but at least, it seems, he's catching up and getting behind the right approach. Doesn't make him a leader, though.

On the issue of CEO compensation, McCain said no CEO of a corporation bailed out by the government should "be making more money than the highest paid government official."

"We can't have taxpayers footing the bill for bloated golden parachutes like we see in the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy," McCain said. "My friends, the top executives are asking for $2-and-a-half billion in bonuses after they ran the company into the ground."

Well, what he's saying is that if we, the taxpayers, own the company then they'll not be compensated more than the highest paid government officials.......

Seems reasonable to me as they're now essentially working for us, under the supervision of Washington.

Which is what Obama has been saying. Good to see that McSame agrees with that common sense approach now.