^Thank God (not literally) the founders of this country actually kept in mind the idea of human selfishness acting against other human selfishness to produce a moderately successful system... Too bad though that our modern government ignores the majority of the principles this country was founded on.

10/1/2008 8:52:16 PM

This crisis resulted from our corrupt political system's influence on greedy big business and banks, which in turn panders to greedy American consumers with insufficient funds. I agree that Americans are suffering from a backwards philosophy that teaches material wealth is the ticket to happiness and success, but the American people will not change this outlook with the drop of a hat.

After all, all people want to believe in themselves, their dreams, their ability to chase them, and their hope of catching them if they work hard enough. That hopeful idea is what America has always aspired too, and that idea represented our country's international identity not so long ago. Our current challenge is to accept the fact that our beloved path in the world has indeed wavered.

This financial crisis isn't just about money, this crisis will show the strength and resolve of the most famous freedom-loving people on earth. If any nation in the world could recover, and recover quickly, it would be the United States of America. This nation was founded on the dream that all people have the right to be happy and reach for the stars, but that happy dream is slowly becoming a dark nightmare.

This is just the beginning of things to come, and we need to put our best foot forward right now. We must reject any bailout bill that would put the majority of Americans at risk without reward. The true test of the greatness of any person or any nation is the ability to stand back up after getting knocked down. Barack Obama says that "we cannot fail" and he need not worry, because we won't fail to recognize the magnitude of this decision. This bailout will either meet the demands of the people, or it will go absolutely nowhere fast.

[Edited on October 1, 2008 at 9:09 PM. Reason : -]

10/1/2008 8:58:31 PM

[Edited on October 1, 2008 at 9:17 PM. Reason : .]

10/1/2008 9:17:38 PM

Fucking traitors just voted for it.

10/1/2008 9:20:17 PM

i'm not really in a state of shock

10/1/2008 9:22:17 PM

I'll post the same thing here as I did in chitchat...


If someone can read the following statement and still support the bailout, I consider them to be certifiably insane:

Quote :

""In fact, some of the most basic details, including the $700 billion figure Treasury would use to buy up bad debt, are fuzzy. "It's not based on any particular data point," a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. "We just wanted to choose a really large number."""

http://www.forbes.com/home/2008/09/23/bailout-paulson-congress-biz-beltway-cx_jz_bw_0923bailout.html

The people that made this shit are telling you to your face that it's utter bull. No rational person should support it.


So, how did we end up with so many complete and utter loonies in our government? (Don't answer that, I already know it's the two-party system)

[Edited on October 1, 2008 at 9:25 PM. Reason : .]

10/1/2008 9:25:15 PM

Nor am I (they haven't passed it yet, but it will be shortly). Like I said before, it's much of an opportunity at a power grab for the government for them to pass it up. Oddly we're now counting on the House to be the rational ones.

10/1/2008 9:26:29 PM

"and the american people via congress are now responsible for bailing out the banks"

"700 is not the real number...it may be more...it may be less"

10/1/2008 9:26:48 PM

Quote :

"and the american people via congress are now responsible for bailing out the banks"

Fuck if we are... accurate representation of the people is impossible with our two-party system... (thanks to a restrictive system designed by two parties for the purpose of keeping only two parties)

If our only two choices are different-smelling piles of shit, we can't really be blamed for ending up with shit.



[Edited on October 1, 2008 at 9:33 PM. Reason : v I know you were quoting someone. I just wanted to say this anyway.]

10/1/2008 9:30:59 PM

haha i'm just the messenger! turn on the tv. any channel. cnbc is what i was quoting. now i'm perusing (not 100% the right word but i wanted to use it) all of my political networks to see whats what. i love getting the full scope. and by full scope, i mean, ofcourse, the full scope of bullshit.

10/1/2008 9:32:43 PM

Quote :

"Too bad though that our modern government ignores the majority of the principles this country was founded on. "

It makes me weep for my future children.

10/1/2008 11:05:31 PM

^ easy solution: don't have any

i'm seriously considering that option because I fear what this country will be like in the 2nd half of this century.

10/1/2008 11:22:23 PM

That revolution idea is starting to sound pretty enticing.

[Edited on October 1, 2008 at 11:37 PM. Reason : rewording]

10/1/2008 11:35:12 PM

they're already preparing for that

10/1/2008 11:37:26 PM

Revolution has been a consistently good idea since before this country's founding.

Don't y'all act as if everything has suddenly gone to shit.

10/1/2008 11:44:33 PM

Quote :

"i'm seriously considering that option because I fear what this country will be like in the 2nd half of this century. "

Fear?

Things are only going to get better.

10/1/2008 11:46:25 PM

Quote :

"Things are only going to get better."

I tend to agree, but remember that there's no guarantee. Dozens of possible scenarios could lead to increased unpleasantness if not outright disaster.

10/1/2008 11:49:01 PM

Anybody ever read A Canticle for Leibowitz? That's sort of the future I envision, but I'm a pessimist by nature.

10/1/2008 11:51:31 PM

^^ true, but if we switched to a mostly libertarianism system, that wouldn't guarantee things get better either. In the long run, it would even be the worst system to go with.

[Edited on October 1, 2008 at 11:51 PM. Reason : ]

10/1/2008 11:51:40 PM

Quote :

"In the long run, it would even be the worst system to go with."

How do figure that? Are you saying it'd be worse than if rock-wielding primitivists took power?

10/1/2008 11:54:01 PM

Yeah, I don't think a truly libertarian political and economic system would be the worst in the long run, quite the opposite actually.

10/1/2008 11:55:42 PM

Quote :

"This financial crisis isn't just about money, this crisis will show the strength and resolve of the most famous freedom-loving people on earth. "

I don't mean to split hairs, but the human element of greed is what drives the concept of capitalism. Money is exacly what it is about.

10/1/2008 11:58:42 PM

The primitivists want to smash my laptop with a rock. The state capitalists want confiscate it because I duplicate bits. How do libertarians weigh in on this important issue?

10/1/2008 11:59:06 PM

^^^^ obviously I don't mean that...

I mean a system that discourages scientific investment is terrible for humanity in the long run. Would libertarians have invested in the Manhattan project, Z-Machine, Iter, or projects like LHC? These are the types of research that will help us leave Earth. If we don't leave Earth, humanity will eventually die out, that'd be a terrible legacy for Libertarianism to leave behind.

[Edited on October 1, 2008 at 11:59 PM. Reason : ]

10/1/2008 11:59:39 PM

Would libertarianism discourage research? I'm not so sure. If the right kind of libertarians took power, they'd basically chuck existing intellectual property laws out the window. I can hardly imagine of anything better for science. We then wouldn't have to stare down the barrel of gun to get those precious data packets.

10/2/2008 12:03:04 AM

^ where would funding come from for the projects though? Right now taxes and the gov. funds them, isn't that antithetical in libertarian ideology?

And this is probably another reason we'd never go down the L path too far. Once the gov. starts to fund one thing for the good of the people, it's a slippery slop to the gov. we have today. L just isn't stable for the way people are.

[Edited on October 2, 2008 at 12:05 AM. Reason : ]

10/2/2008 12:04:32 AM

What makes you think that a libertarian system would deter scientific advancement. Hell, most of the really significant breakthroughs are funded by tons and tons of sources, not just the government. The Hughes foundation is making and funding some of the most important medical research going today. The most famous and generous scientific grants are not government sponsored, they come from places like the MacArthur foundation. If it has significant promise it'll be funded either by a charitable organization or from individuals or corporations with long term vision and money to fund it. You act like there was no R&D before the FDA.

10/2/2008 12:04:59 AM

this bailout saved the economy from depression and will put an ease on the credit crunch so that any american can own a home. Its the American dream. If you have a problem with this bailout then I have already supplied a list of the better places so you can pick one and leave. Also note that all the better places have much bigger governments than ours...

10/2/2008 12:06:24 AM

Quote :

"Hell, most of the really significant breakthroughs are funded by tons and tons of sources, not just the government. "

Most research in the US (the world leader in research) is funded mostly by the gov.

Where would you have gotten 6.4 billion dollars to build the LHC, when it likely won't make back that money for a LONG time (if ever)? What private industry or charity would fund that? Without a gov.-like agency collecting money, that'd be EXTREMELY difficult.

10/2/2008 12:09:33 AM

Quote :

"^ where would funding come from for the projects though? Right now taxes and the gov. funds them, isn't that antithetical in libertarian ideology?"

Yeah, though it's possible voluntary scientific spending would increase to fill the void. Corporations already fund plenty of research. But the kind of projects you're talking about could be a tough sell in a libertarian world.

Quote :

"Most research in the US (the world leader in research) is funded mostly by the gov."

Where are you getting this figure?

10/2/2008 12:11:12 AM

Meh, Celera was beating the HGP to the punch for quite some time. It happens. Large Hadron Collider is a pretty special case.

10/2/2008 12:11:26 AM

Y'all know I'll be donating to the Singularity Institute and such if ever get money. But then, I'm a nut.

For lulz, here's Cato's take on the matter:

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6168

10/2/2008 12:14:47 AM

Government has a role in funding research for sure. I'm pretty small government, but I see only benefits from funding scientific research. Honestly, what is the percentage of the federal budget spent on this? I'm pretty sure it is fairly minuscule.

10/2/2008 12:18:45 AM

I never post in the soap box because Im just not that smart as far as politics go.

What I do know about simple math is this:

According to the 2000 Census, there are around 150 million people in the workforce (age 16 and up).

Our so called representatives just asked every single working American to write a $6000 check to companies that were out to fuck them in the first place.

Feel free to pick this apart if my logic is flawed.

10/2/2008 12:19:03 AM

^^^^^
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08320/

30 billion of the 49 billion spent in the US came from the government.

The vast majority of the rest of private funding went to biological research (medicine, IOW).

Which means if you assume industry has the same relative bend, you're not going to find much private investment in theoretical physics.

^^ True, but as I said earlier...

Quote :

"And this is probably another reason we'd never go down the L path too far. Once the gov. starts to fund one thing for the good of the people, it's a slippery slop to the gov. we have today. L just isn't stable for the way people are. "

[Edited on October 2, 2008 at 12:22 AM. Reason : ]

10/2/2008 12:21:28 AM

I love the Cato Institute.

10/2/2008 12:23:46 AM

Quote :

"In current dollars, federally funded academic R&D expenditures rose 1.1% in FY 2007 to $30.4 billion."

Quote :

"Overall, universities and colleges reported S&E R&D expenditures of $49.4 billion in FY 2007, 3.5% more than in the previous year ($47.7 billion) (table 1)."

I think you've made a bit of an error.

10/2/2008 12:27:02 AM

^
yeah... but...
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08317

Of the type of research i was describe, the gov. outspends private industry by almost 4:1. For application and development though, private industry outspends by 4:1, and is 95% of all private industry expenditures. It's clear they'd rather let tax payers fund the potentially fruitless endeavors, while private industry reaps the $$$ benefit in the applications and development (not that this is a bad thing... the point is they are hesitant on funding what might just be pipe dreams).

10/2/2008 12:57:21 AM

Quote :

"this bailout saved the economy from depression and will put an ease on the credit crunch so that any american can own a home. "

This bailout hasn't done shit, mostly because it hasn't passed. And yet, despite all the doomsaying, the economy hasn't collapsed. In fact, short of the slight dip on monday, it seems to be chugging along just fine for an economic crisis of this magnitude. I'm in favor of seeing just how long this will go on without a bailout, I bet it lasts much longer than anyone insisting we need a bailout now says it will. As was said before, anytime anyone is telling you "act now, spend your money on this one time chance before it's too late", you're being sold something and, chances are, taken to the cleaners.

10/2/2008 1:11:13 AM

^^ Well, it's definitely possible a world with libertarian governments would eschew projects such as the LHC. That'd make me sad, but I don't know if it'd be the worst of all possible outcomes. The pipe dreams would likely eventually become worth funding, as corporate research advanced science overall. We'd definitely get off this rock. Folks are already trying to commercialize space.

All this talk makes me think of Gibson's all-powerful corporations. I don't believe I want that future. Let's skip the vat-grown ninja assassins.

10/2/2008 1:24:26 AM

10/2/2008 12:43:36 PM

Quote :

"This financial crisis isn't just about money, this crisis will show the strength and resolve of the most famous freedom-loving people on earth."

Quote :

"I don't mean to split hairs, but the human element of greed is what drives the concept of capitalism. Money is exactly what it is about."

I agree with you, it is about money. However, it's not just about money. That was a rather important "just."

10/2/2008 12:45:41 PM

Quote :

"This crisis resulted from our corrupt political system's influence on greedy big business and banks, which in turn panders to greedy American consumers with insufficient funds."

I know there is a great urge to make this a fundamentally human story about failed human objectives or morals. A tale about good vs. evil.

However, I don't think there is any evidence for that. It is a fundamentally technical failure. The CDO model did not perform as expected. The rating agencies were not sophisticated enough to model a world in which the fundamental rules were changing so rapidly. The Federal Reserve did not realize early enough the profound effects that foreign currency accumulation and technical innovation ob Wall Street were having on their ability to control the economy. Regulators did not and probably could not anticipate the extent to which the traditional banking system was being rapidly replaced by Commercial Paper.

People have always been greedy. Governments always to a greater or lesser extent corrupt. What changed this time were the technical elements that keep the system in check. They failed and that is pretty much the long and the short of it. I know it is not comforting because without someone to blame and destroy there is no way to be sure it won't happen again. But, there is no way to be sure it won't happen again. And, indeed it almost certainly will. No one can foresee every possibility. No one can completely predict the consquences of a rapidly changing world.

10/2/2008 1:52:06 PM

2:1

The House passes this even crappier bill...

10/2/2008 2:05:30 PM

^
I tell ya...the speed with which politicians on both sides are pushing passage and the extra crap they are tacking onto the original piece of garbage is making this whole thing stink to high heaven.

10/2/2008 5:39:36 PM

some of the extra shat that got added

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/bailout.pork/index.html


some of it is so off the wall, like ending excise taxes for VI and Puerto Rico WTF???

its gonna take a brick through congress's window before they get the message.

10/2/2008 8:18:33 PM

I need a Ron Paul fix....

Quote :

"Slowly, like the Titanic turning around, sentiments on the Hill shifted, and we heard Congressmen capitulating and changing their tune a little, desperately trying to find ways to salvage the bailout without completely enraging their constituencies. Now we hear about taxpayer protections, about golden parachutes, and about other nuances that hardly cover up the fact that we would be creating more money out of thin air and further devaluing the dollar! The problem is not HOW the government is spending this money; it’s the fact that the government is spending this money. We don’t have it. We are already nearly $10 trillion in debt, not including unfunded liabilities. We already spend about $1 trillion a year we don’t have on our overseas empire. Now nearly $1 trillion more is somehow supposed to magically appear and solve all our problems! No – creating more money might delay the inevitable for some well-connected banks on Wall Street, but in a few weeks we will find ourselves right back in this same position, but much poorer. The unfortunate thing is that we’ve already spent at least $700 billion on other bailouts that did not solve the problem. And while all this negotiation was taking place, the auto industry was quietly bailed out, with no controversy, no discussion, to the tune of $25 billion. Inevitably, it appears Congress will call their constituents’ bluff and the bailout will pass, because that is the habit Wall Street and Washington have fallen into. People are right to be concerned about our financial future. I’ve been talking for 30 some years about reasons we need to be concerned and change our ways. We find ourselves now in a position of no good options, and no silver bullets. But the worst thing we can do is to compound our problems by intensifying the mistakes of the past. We do have tough economic times ahead, no doubt, no matter what we do, even if we do nothing. The question, is will we have the courage to take our medicine now and get it over with, or will we prolong the misery for many years to come? I’m less and less optimistic about the answer to that question."

10/2/2008 8:22:13 PM

From the Motley Fool...

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2008/10/02/dear-wall-street-were-watching-you.aspx

Quote :

"Dear Wall Street: We're Watching You By Bill Mann Welcome to your nightmare, Wall Street. For years and years you've been able to do pretty much whatever you wanted. Paid yourselves as much as you wanted, created esoteric products, pushed around regulators, bought politicians, took enormous risks -- risks far bigger than your companies could have ever hoped to cover by themselves. And now you've done something incredible. You've managed to tarnish -- to bring into question, even -- the primacy and superiority of free market capitalism. That takes a special kind of stupid. It takes really smart stupid. It takes Harvard stupid. But you, you managed to do it. You did it by creating a system that was a complete bastardization of capitalism. The free market is pretty good at ensuring that successes are rewarded and failures are penalized. It fails when stupid doesn't come with penalties. Harvard stupid comes from thinking that you're smarter than everyone without recognizing that you still might not be smart enough to control the evil your creations threaten to unleash. The genius financial products that kept you eyes-deep in Cristal and vacation homes nearly caused the global financial system to seize up. Do you think that the titans from the University of Maine could bring the free market, the global economy to its knees? I sure don't, if for nothing else because they don't come from the right families. I'm not quite sure that the "let 'em fail" crowd realizes just how spectacularly you almost succeeded at failing. And I do mean you. Yes, mortgage banks everywhere participated, and yes, a whole lot of people bought houses that a few seconds on a $3 calculator would have told them they could not afford. But you know and I know that it all started because your yawning maws would take in whatever garbage-quality credit risks you could find because you could feed them into the machine and they'd come out smelling of rosewater on the other side -- part of a AAA-rated tranche of loans for you to sell, speculate in, or re-securitize. You got your sales commissions, your fat bonuses, your skyrocketing share prices. Here's what else you got: thousands of families losing their homes. The devastation in some parts of the country is so bad that it's transcended the financial on into the ecological. Click on this, if you dare. So here's the thing. It seems ever more likely that the U.S. taxpayer is going to step in and clean up the mess that your chase for yield created. The Senate has passed a bill, and now comes a revote in the House of Representatives. If they pass the bill and decide to put your mess on the Underhill tab, we, the Underhills, own you. (Yes, that was a Fletch reference.) Today you might do a little dance and thank the Almighty that the cavalry is on the way. But recognize that this cavalry isn't some sovereign wealth fund from Norway or Abu Dhabi. You can't roll out some statistical arbitrage chop socky and expect us to believe you. We don't. Further, we're not at all pleased that you nearly managed to ruin capitalism for the rest of us. And we have folks in our midst who are capable of reading financial statements. Remember those big fat bonuses you got last year for turning toxic paper into AAA-rated inverse IO Strips which you dumped on some benighted bank somewhere (who really ought to have known better)? If your bonuses come within an order of magnitude of where they were last year, I'm pretty sure there will, in fact, be bloodthirsty mobs. By the time they're done, Wall Street will look like it has been hit with a wholly unlikely combination of calamities including hurricanes, staph infections, choking, golf ball-sized hail, dropsy, carpal tunnel syndrome, homeowners' association meetings, and Mongol invasion. It's the kind of violent force of nature you're pretty sure you'd rather have pointing away from you. Congress knows it, too. They would like nothing more than an excuse to frogmarch a few of you down to Washington for any perceived inability on your part to get That Which We Are Coming From. The gigantic paydays of the past aren't coming back anytime soon. Truth be told, you were never worth that kind of money anyway. Sorry, Wall Street. Your Masters of the Universe privileges have been revoked. Please stand by; your new assignments will arrive shortly."

I hope everyone's calling their representatives, the House's email system isn't working...

10/3/2008 11:02:34 AM

Quote :

"It is remarkable that Congress would be willing to give Secretary Paulson such enormous power in running this bailout given his advocacy of rule changes that played such an important role in this financial disaster, and the extent to which he personally profited from these changes. This would be like giving the bank robber who cleaned out the vaults the opportunity to set the banks finances in order -- and letting him keep the loot. Let's hear it for second chances!"

http://www.cepr.net/index.php/op-eds-&-columns/op-eds-&-columns/letting-the-bank-robber-fix-the-bank-s-books/

10/3/2008 12:33:11 PM

Voting now,

http://www.cnn.com/video/live/live.html?stream=stream3 .

Looks like it'll pass so far, 104-40.

10/3/2008 1:13:13 PM