BAILOUT PROPOSAL PUTS "CONSTITUTION AT RISK"….
LAWMAKERS RAIL AGAINST BAILOUT: "Not Acceptable"… "Stunning And Unprecedented In Its Scope And Lack Of Detail"… "Take Wall Street's Pain And Spread It To The Taxpayers"… Crisis "Entirely Foreseeable And Preventable, Not An Act Of God"... Paulson: "It's Embarrassing"... Stocks Fall Again...
WASHINGTON — Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. received an angry and skeptical reception on Tuesday when he appeared before the Senate Banking Committee to ask Congress to promptly give him wide authority to rescue the nation’s financial system.
Mr. Paulson urged lawmakers “to enact this bill quickly and cleanly, and avoid slowing it down with other provisions that are unrelated or don’t have broad support.”
The Federal Reserve chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, who appeared with Mr. Paulson, said the financial system “continues to be very unpredictable, and very worrisome,” and that inaction could lead to a recession.
But after hours of back-and-forth, the committee’s leaders said explicitly what had seemed clear all day: that they rejected the administration’s plan. “What they have sent us is not acceptable,” the committee chairman, Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut, told The Associated Press.
The panel’s ranking Republican agreed. “We have to look at some alternatives,” Senator Richard C. Shelby of Alabama told The A.P.
The Federal Reserve chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, who appeared with Mr. Paulson, said the financial system “continues to be very unpredictable, and very worrisome,” and that inaction could lead to a recession.
But after hours of back-and-forth, the committee’s leaders said explicitly what had seemed clear all day: that they rejected the administration’s plan. “What they have sent us is not acceptable,” the committee chairman, Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut, told The Associated Press.
The panel’s ranking Republican agreed. “We have to look at some alternatives,” Senator Richard C. Shelby of Alabama told The A.P.
Zack Exley, 09.22.2008
Have you actually read the bill that Secretary Paulson and his Goldman assistants wrote for Congress? Not the current version (I shudder thinking about it) with all its inserts from financial industry lobbyists, but the first version. It was beautiful in its simplicity and proved that revolutions can be initiated by the stroke of a pen in societies ruled by law -- as long as ruling elites supports them.
It got me thinking. I have a mortgage. I still owe a lot on it. People in my neighborhood are in the process of foreclosure. And still others are struggling to pay rents that spiked in the real estate bubble but show no sign of coming down with housing prices.
I decided to use the treasury's proposal as a template for one that would help me and my neighbors. Paulson's bill is so user friendly, that it took me only 15 minutes just now to convert it from a bailout for billionaires to a "Homeownership For All" act. Scroll down to read my proposal to Congress.
Some of you will be asking, "Where will the money come from? We don't have any trillions left!" That's a silly question. We didn't have trillions for the war. We don't have trillions for this bailout either. The government is essentially printing money to pay out these trillions. Well, not actually printing it -- but it is pledging to borrow huge sums of money to meet these obligations. Who has to pay that back? That will be decided in the future in the struggle between the rich, the middle-class and the poor over taxes and the federal budget.
Yes, the dollar will crash (it's backed now by bad mortgage investments thanks to Paulson's bailout). Yes, there will be inflation. But that's all happening already. When things get this crazy, it's no longer about amounts of money -- what's really being negotiated in Paulson's bailout (and mine) are social relations. In other words, Paulson is (as we speak) winning society's commitment exchange future payments by all Americans for worthless assets owned by a bunch of rich people, pension funds and university endowments.
In Paulson's world, struggling homeowners and renters will not get any such deal. Their relationship to society stays the same: if they fail financially, then eventually a sheriff comes to their door and orders them out of their home. All I'm doing is proposing the same kind of relationship-shift for ordinary Americans with regard to housing. In my proposal, the government buys our mortgages themselves and sets new terms that we can afford. Maybe "the Secretary" will even decide to forgive some of our principal. Is that unfair? Maybe. But the consequences are so dire -- millions of Americans out on the street, whole neighborhoods boarded up, etc... -- we have no choice! It's just like what Paulson says, except not ridiculous.
Have you actually read the bill that Secretary Paulson and his Goldman assistants wrote for Congress? Not the current version (I shudder thinking about it) with all its inserts from financial industry lobbyists, but the first version. It was beautiful in its simplicity and proved that revolutions can be initiated by the stroke of a pen in societies ruled by law -- as long as ruling elites supports them.
It got me thinking. I have a mortgage. I still owe a lot on it. People in my neighborhood are in the process of foreclosure. And still others are struggling to pay rents that spiked in the real estate bubble but show no sign of coming down with housing prices.
I decided to use the treasury's proposal as a template for one that would help me and my neighbors. Paulson's bill is so user friendly, that it took me only 15 minutes just now to convert it from a bailout for billionaires to a "Homeownership For All" act. Scroll down to read my proposal to Congress.
Some of you will be asking, "Where will the money come from? We don't have any trillions left!" That's a silly question. We didn't have trillions for the war. We don't have trillions for this bailout either. The government is essentially printing money to pay out these trillions. Well, not actually printing it -- but it is pledging to borrow huge sums of money to meet these obligations. Who has to pay that back? That will be decided in the future in the struggle between the rich, the middle-class and the poor over taxes and the federal budget.
Yes, the dollar will crash (it's backed now by bad mortgage investments thanks to Paulson's bailout). Yes, there will be inflation. But that's all happening already. When things get this crazy, it's no longer about amounts of money -- what's really being negotiated in Paulson's bailout (and mine) are social relations. In other words, Paulson is (as we speak) winning society's commitment exchange future payments by all Americans for worthless assets owned by a bunch of rich people, pension funds and university endowments.
In Paulson's world, struggling homeowners and renters will not get any such deal. Their relationship to society stays the same: if they fail financially, then eventually a sheriff comes to their door and orders them out of their home. All I'm doing is proposing the same kind of relationship-shift for ordinary Americans with regard to housing. In my proposal, the government buys our mortgages themselves and sets new terms that we can afford. Maybe "the Secretary" will even decide to forgive some of our principal. Is that unfair? Maybe. But the consequences are so dire -- millions of Americans out on the street, whole neighborhoods boarded up, etc... -- we have no choice! It's just like what Paulson says, except not ridiculous.
posted by Kangaroo Brisbane Australia at 6:19 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home