How the hell are we going to afford ‘a Swedish-styled solution to healthcare and CO2 emissions’ if the economy remains in shambles? More debt? Yes, Wallstreet was so very pleased to hear Geithner’s plan. It must look great from where they’re sitting – business as usual and in the end the taxpayer gets stuck with the bill if all doesn’t turn out as planned. This plan makes the same stupid mistake that got us into this crisis in the first place. It bets that these assets will appreciate in value. Financials and private citizens have made this mistake – the false belief that market conditions will only improve, despite fundamental weakness – time and again and will continue to make this mistake if government persists in coddling stupidity. Good government requires the willingness and ability to make tough decisions. The fear of expending political capital is a pathetic reason to avoid making the difficult decisions that current circumstances demand.

Geithner is trying to get investors involved in the same plan Bush looked at was was called, “Cash for trash.” Part of the problem is that investors ran away (why we have this crises) and it looks like one would go into stocks rather than junk bonds with low returns (tied to the low mortgage rates). I doubt there will be enough investors to make any dent in this yet he expects enough investors to make a major impact. I believe that’s why Paulson and Bush abandoned that plan which Geithner is floating as his plan.

There are two parts to the problem of these toxic loans. One is the foreclosed homes and the other is the bond attached to the homes. Buying the bad bonds is not the answer. One can’t shelter homeless people in bonds, but they can be sheltered in houses. If the houses are bought, the bonds are “called” and those toxic bonds would be replaced by cash. Then HUD money can be used to slowly buy up those newly occupied homes (HUD has enough money to buy over 100,000 $290,000 homes a year). The fed with their trillions sunk into this mess should have also bought the foreclosed homes and then sold the occupied homes to HUD and or did rent to buy program.

Geithner is yet another bad choice by the Obama Admin. With his Cabinet in charge, and Pelosi as speaker of the house we can look forward to “change” certainly, but not any good change, unless you are in this country illegally or are an unemployed crack head welfare recipient. Then Obama is planning on hooking you up.

I think that we’re seeing more DLC/”fellate the corporate sector” behavior. There’s real anger against the financial sector among the population–enough to force Congress to act. This is an opportunity, and timidity not only keeps us on the hook for the hedge-fund gamblers’ losses, it also makes opposing health care reform and CO2 regulation harder, because losses beget losses. Time to attack, and hard.

The first Financial Plan that Hugo Chavez personally endorsed!!
Lenon & Stalin would be proud!!

Why the heck should we give these people any more money? They’ve already abused the “bailout” to no end after THEY CREATED THE FINANCIAL STORM THAT REQUIRED IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. This is ludicrous. This whole plan is insane. AIG isn’t “too big to fail” it’s too screwed up to allow to continue. And now they want to tack on another trillion or so to guarantee that the hedge-fund managers can walk away with huge profits and no risk of losses? Einstein once described insanity as “doing the same thing over and expecting a different result.” Why should we expect a better result out of this “new” plan that was floated under the Bush administration with a different name?

I was watching Greta Van Sustren and she made a good point. Why are these “sweetheart deals” on toxic assets only offered to these wealthy individuals, funds and corporations. If they want to help American taxpayers, why can’t we get in on the same deal.

Jed Clampett

Yes, how is it they can give these idiots these sweetheart deals and leave the public out of them. I want a loan for $75,000 with only 5% interest, simple interest added on top of the initial loan rather than compounded interest that accumulates and increases the amount of profit made on the loan.

How come the wealthy aren’t saddled by USURY terms on loans? Oh yea, they own this country, the rest of the public are merely serfs working for their puppet masters.
Look up USURY on wiki, interesting read.
Congratulations, you are now ‘more equal than others’.

You were led to believe you were exporting ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ when in fact you were implementing ‘corporate soci@lism’ and ‘fascism’; damn you people are blind, perhaps should have paid a bit more attention in government classes, huh?

Jed-
I think it’s time that you come clean and convey to us precisely what distinguishes you from the rest of us ’serfs’, ’slaves’, ‘lemings’, ’sheeple’, etc.

So is Geithner there because of the relationship between Obama’s mother and Geithner’s father? I can not see any other reason.

Jed Clampett

Not a thing bFOOOLay, we are all in the same boat, only difference is our level of awareness. And though we are all in the same boat, we are on different decks, some just get a better view of the ocean from the deck, while others are content at looking at the plain walls of the galley and seeing the world through the limited view of a porthole.

Nothing like you and your own personal boat that takes you above all others and gives you the RIGHT to insult and curse whomever it pleases you to treat as a lesser human. Must get pretty lonely there in your one man dingy.

I ride in a submarine.

Jed Clampett

Yea, the USS Mr. Hankey, painted a camouflage brown.

hidey-ho!