UPDATE: The Paulson Bailout IS a Stick Up!

by Karen Hatter | September 25, 2008 at 05:43 pm
461 views | 42 Recommendations | 14 comments

Videos

Henry Paulson: Bailout The Only Effective Plan For Americans

see larger video

sourced by Karen Hatter

Henry Paulson: Bailout The Only Effective Plan For Americans

An article, appearing at Forbes.com, on September 23, 2008, discussing Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson's bailout plan, supported by Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke, the plan presented to members of Congress, which has become bogged down, with the article appearing two days before the hastily arranged meeting, chaired by President Bush on September 25, 2008, states, regarding the $700,000,000,000.00 (700 billion dollars) being sited as necessary for bringing the economy back from the brink of destruction: 

"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."

Please click here to read the original article.

UPDATE:

The latest on the Paulson stick up, amended and hashed out by Congress, announced on September 28, 2008.

From the above linked article:

The plan would give Congress a stronger hand in controlling the money than the Bush administration wanted. Lawmakers could block half the money and force the president to jump through some hoops before using it all. The government could get at $250 billion immediately, $100 billion more if the president certified it was necessary, and the last $350 billion with a separate certification — and subject to a congressional resolution of disapproval.

 

Also at Forbes.com:

From Paulson: Bailout Price Tag Unknown, dated September 8, 2008:

On Monday morning, Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson admitted in a television interview that "we ultimately don't know" how much the recently announced bailout for the troubled mortgage lenders will end up costing. He said the rescue is "not something I'm happy about" and that the final price tag will depend on "how long it will take for housing prices to stabilize and the housing market to come back."

The intervention by the federal government, outlined Sunday (see "After the Bailout"), will bring in new senior management, eventually shrink the firms’ portfolios and saddle taxpayers with billions in liabilities. St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank President William Poole said that the bailout could cost as much as $300 billion.

Also at NowPublic:

Update: Stock Market Tanking? Don't Blame Regulators! 

recommend This comment thread is now closed
dunkelberg
dunkelberg
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 18:34 on September 25th, 2008

"We just wanted to choose a really large number."
That about sums it up for the Bush Administration's policy making.  They just pull numbers out of their hats.

0
drrexdexter

How 'bout this?...the BETTER way to bring the economy back from the brink, (...and is it necessarily the "brink" of collapse, or are some of the major "mucky-mucks" concerned more about factors of control?...), is to give the current big buck commanders REAL Golden Parachutes and open the airplane door. GERONIMO! ( And my apologies to a truly brave and resourceful Native Chief.)

Ric/Dexter

drrexdexter
drrexdexter
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 18:47 on September 25th, 2008

Karen Hatter, Note my comment...and to add a thought to "Dunkleberg's" statement-I don't think it was their HAT they pulled it out of..."

Heritage
Heritage
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 19:40 on September 25th, 2008

Karen Hatter, I like this story. It's good stuff.

Jordan Yerman
Jordan Yerman
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 04:59 on September 26th, 2008

We're basically being told that our tax dollars are getting dropped into a black hole, but it's somehow for the greater good...

0
iraqivetwifeforchange

I think this is why we saw Democrats questioning where they came up with these numbers. Now the proposal has been changed so that we are only giving around $250 billion initially with the option to fund more if needed.

I think most Americans are clueless as to what exactly it is we are buying. Only about $150 billion of this proposal is totally a bailout. The rest is stuff that actually we stand to make a good deal of money on in 1 year or 2. But It is still a lot of money, no matter how you look at it.

iraqivetwifeforchange
iraqivetwifeforchange
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 09:58 on September 26th, 2008

Karen Hatter, I like this story. It's good stuff.

0
dunkelberg

Fiction and flights of fancy - the hallmark of the Bush economic policy.

Amy Judd
Amy Judd
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 13:10 on September 26th, 2008

Karen Hatter, I like this story. It's good stuff.

Rhonda J Mangus
Rhonda J Mangus
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 13:12 on September 26th, 2008

Karen Hatter, I like this story. It's good stuff.

0
Karen Hatter

My thanks to Everyone for reading this, for your comments and flags! I do appreciate it.

Fairbanks
Fairbanks
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 08:41 on September 27th, 2008

The bailout has an aroma to it.  Too much of a hurry.  What if we get to see some numbers and names and some OMB studies and get back to this in a few months? 

JD Rucker
JD Rucker
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 18:28 on September 28th, 2008

Karen Hatter, I like this story. It's good stuff.

duo
duo
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 19:18 on September 28th, 2008

Karen Hatter, I like this story. It's good stuff.

I know just enough about finances to know I need to get a job soon.  So forgive me when I ask, what happened to the money this bailout money is going to replace?  Can't they just go get it back from Switzerland or Cancun or whatever?

This story was created over 3 months ago, the comment thread is now closed.

closeSign in to NowPublic

is reporting from