President Bush is bringing presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain into negotiations on a $700 billion rescue of Wall Street as Democrats and Republicans near agreement on a bailout plan with more protections for taxpayers and new help for distressed homeowners.
1. Comment by J T. (Tuttle)— September 25,2008 @ 6:32AM
Ratings:-13+3
It is quite telling that the only way Barack Obama would return to Washington to straighten out this mess is because of a phone call from the President.
As much as I don't like a bailout, politics needs to be put aside so that we as a country can remain stable. If these financial instutions fail, then all of us are in a serious world of hurt. Unfortunately, part of me believes that that is exactly what Barack Obama wanted.
2. Comment by Lila S. (2245)— September 25,2008 @ 7:11AM
Ratings:-4+10
Well my take on it is they are so THEY (meaning dems and repulicans), are so concerned about the poor homeowner, what about the poor renter, the homeless, the underemployed? Heck I make decent amount of money and just living expenses food, gas etc has gone through the roof. We need to take the politics out of this one we could start a whole thing on whos to blame for this one, the homeowner who had to have that big house when the one they were in was just fine, the lenders, the rich oil guys making big bucks on us poor folks. So dont bring Barak into this he didnt cause it and he certainly is concerned and if you had heard last night both McCain and Obama are writing a joint statement to address what is going on. McCain said they should suspend the campaign until this is all over, he is afraid the current administration is going to torpedo his campaign because everyone wants someone to blame.
3. Comment by rg a. (ahneron)— September 25,2008 @ 8:36AM
Ratings:-3+8
NO! NO on the bail out!
Democrats your giving money back to the rich! Are you now for giving more to big business and the rich?Republicans this is Socialism! Do you now think Government is the answer?
Sounds like we have a bunch of Repubcrats in Washington!
4. Comment by Ralph A. (6505)— September 25,2008 @ 8:40AM
Ratings:-3+7
This bailout is really getting to McCain, not sure what to do. It would be nice to take politics out of all issues, but we are dealing with politicans, caring about themselves only. They don't care what their action or inaction has on the country, It is about protecting the votes in November. McCain is running scared, because he has no economic knowledge, so it puts him in a real bad position. But maybe all his operatives and lobbist friends can give him some ideas. Maybe even kick a few bucks into his campaign fund.
5. Comment by elvis C. (scottish42)— September 25,2008 @ 8:48AM
Ratings:-1+6
This deal seems a bit more palatable than the one Bsh/Paulson were pushing. Clinton (and others) is right on in that this deal CANNOT enrich the companies that are unloading the debt.
This is the sort of deal that I would have some comfort with.
1) I think the bad debt should be limited to mortgage securities which is where the biggest problem is.
2) A percentage of whatever we pay for the debt should equate to stock ownership in the company. More debt means more ownership.
3) There should be pre-arranged way to set the price for the stock to be bought back by the company. Government cannot refuse to sell. I imagine some average of closing prices during the 5 trading days preceding a repurchase.
4) In the meantime, the value of the stock will go up and maybe the government makes some money here and there.
5) As long as the government holds stock in the companies, there should be limits on executive compensation and severe limits on separation packages.
6) Once the compnay buys back their stock, they can do what they want again.
7. Comment by BellyUp M. (BellyUp)— September 25,2008 @ 9:41AM
Ratings:-0+2
I'd like to see them consider a less centralized version of this same plan. Rather than have a federal RTC-type organization buy these toxic assets, leave them where they are, and allow their current owners to put them over in a special corner of the balance sheet and not write them off for now.
The solution is time. Time is money. We can buy the time it will take for the toxicicty of the assets to subside (that means, reagain their value, as they surely will over time).
Leave these assets where they are, and allow them to be used as collateral - thereby creating some value for them in the meanwhile - for loans from the government rather than purchase proceeds.
Mechanically, the effect is the same... $700 billion in cash changes hands from the government to these troubled institutions and these toxic assets are pulled out of the profit/loss calculation of otherwise healthy operations. But there would be no actual transfer of ownership, and the government would generate low-risk interest income on its loans, rather than assume the maybe/maybe not risk of possibly recovering value later when the value of these assets recovers.
The government should act as a banker in this deal, not an owner. Ownership has risks and those risks should remain where they are.
8. Comment by Scott H. (Vatsyayana)— September 25,2008 @ 10:07AM
Ratings:-3+1
Hmmm. Interesting how Pelosi and Company have had control for 2 years and yet they (the people who actually make the laws) didn't fix this mess before it came to a head. The president only signs the law in, it's Congress and Senate that draft the law and vote on it.
It's amazing how many people move to the mantra of "Blame Bush". Truly one of the greatest scams of this new century is how the Democratic party pulls the wool over people's eyes in order to increase thier socialist agenda.
11. Comment by Ralph A. (6505)— September 25,2008 @ 10:52AM
Ratings:-1+1
OMG, look what McCain did, got a deal together just overnight. Now he will surely win the election. <G>
12. Comment by Tucson R. (TucsonRat)— September 25,2008 @ 11:48AM
Ratings:-0+3
Scott -- actually, what's amazing is your total lack of understanding of the political process. But, hey, if it makes you feel better, blame it all on a Senate that can't bust a Republican filibuster and a Congress that doesn't have the votes to override a veto by a president who was more than happy to give everything to his buddies when they controlled Congress and absolutely nothing now.
I remember Bush in his first election, his first inaugural speech and his second. His mantra was "I'm the guy who can work both sides of the aisle." He was lying through his teeth and said whatever he needed to win an election.
We've added a feature to the comments pages - the ability to easily add paragraph breaks, boldface type and a few other typographical aids to your comments. Launch toolbar
Use single or double carriage returns to put line breaks or paragraph breaks in your comments.
At the same time, we removed the ability to put HTML coding into the comments. People were misusing that feature by pulling in cartoons, photos and other copyrighted materials from publications elsewhere. We won't allow you to use our pages to violate other publications' copyrights.
We've added a story to the site that includes a few tips to resolve common problems. You can use the comment thread attached to that story for practice and testing of the markup tools: Go to story | Go to the practice thread
General Instructions
Welcome to the story comments section of StarNet. Here are some helpful hints with you:
You must be logged in to comment or rate comments. Log in or create an account through our registration system.
All comments are subject to our guidelines (listed below) and our user agreement.
Comment Reporting
You can report other users' comments that are in violation of the StarNet User Guidelines. Users are limited to three (3) reports per day and are not allowed to report their own comments.
Any comment that has been reported will be moderated by StarNet. The comment will either be approved or rejected. Approval or rejection is based solely on the StarNet User Guidelines. Comments are only able to be reported once and are not viewable while awaiting moderation.
If you are a registered site user and are logged in, you can vote thumbs up or thumbs down on the comments.
The total votes of approval and disapproval on that comment will be updated when you vote — including your vote and any other votes that have been cast since your browser last loaded this page.
Votes by users who have been banned from commenting don't count in the totals.
User Guidelines
We welcome your comments on articles, editorials, columns, other topics on StarNet or any subjects important to you. Commentary submitted to StarNet (www.azstarnet.com) may be published or distributed in print, electronically or other forms. Opinions expressed in www.azstarnet.com's comments reflect the opinions of the author, and are not necessarily the opinions of the Star, StarNet, or its parent company. See terms of service for more information.
Our guidelines prohibit the solicitation of products or services, the impersonation of another site user, threatening or harassing postings and the use of vulgar, abusive, obscene or sexually oriented language, defamatory or illegal material. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. It's fine to criticize ideas, but ad hominem attacks are prohibited. Users who violate those standards may lose their privileges on azstarnet.com.
Don't violate other publications' copyrights.
Do we edit user comments? No. The writers are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. StarNet reserves the right to remove comments that violate our guidelines policy.
Deal said to be near on big financial bailout plan
President Bush is bringing presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain into negotiations on a $700 billion rescue of Wall Street as Democrats and Republicans near agreement on a bailout plan with more protections for taxpayers and new help for distressed homeowners.It is quite telling that the only way Barack Obama would return to Washington to straighten out this mess is because of a phone call from the President.
As much as I don't like a bailout, politics needs to be put aside so that we as a country can remain stable. If these financial instutions fail, then all of us are in a serious world of hurt. Unfortunately, part of me believes that that is exactly what Barack Obama wanted.
Report this comment
Well my take on it is they are so THEY (meaning dems and repulicans), are so concerned about the poor homeowner, what about the poor renter, the homeless, the underemployed? Heck I make decent amount of money and just living expenses food, gas etc has gone through the roof. We need to take the politics out of this one we could start a whole thing on whos to blame for this one, the homeowner who had to have that big house when the one they were in was just fine, the lenders, the rich oil guys making big bucks on us poor folks. So dont bring Barak into this he didnt cause it and he certainly is concerned and if you had heard last night both McCain and Obama are writing a joint statement to address what is going on. McCain said they should suspend the campaign until this is all over, he is afraid the current administration is going to torpedo his campaign because everyone wants someone to blame.
Report this comment
NO! NO on the bail out!
Democrats your giving money back to the rich! Are you now for giving more to big business and the rich?Republicans this is Socialism! Do you now think Government is the answer?
Sounds like we have a bunch of Repubcrats in Washington!
Don't support this Cooperate welfare !
Report this comment
This bailout is really getting to McCain, not sure what to do. It would be nice to take politics out of all issues, but we are dealing with politicans, caring about themselves only. They don't care what their action or inaction has on the country, It is about protecting the votes in November. McCain is running scared, because he has no economic knowledge, so it puts him in a real bad position. But maybe all his operatives and lobbist friends can give him some ideas. Maybe even kick a few bucks into his campaign fund.
Report this comment
This deal seems a bit more palatable than the one Bsh/Paulson were pushing. Clinton (and others) is right on in that this deal CANNOT enrich the companies that are unloading the debt.
This is the sort of deal that I would have some comfort with.
1) I think the bad debt should be limited to mortgage securities which is where the biggest problem is.
2) A percentage of whatever we pay for the debt should equate to stock ownership in the company. More debt means more ownership.
3) There should be pre-arranged way to set the price for the stock to be bought back by the company. Government cannot refuse to sell. I imagine some average of closing prices during the 5 trading days preceding a repurchase.
4) In the meantime, the value of the stock will go up and maybe the government makes some money here and there.
5) As long as the government holds stock in the companies, there should be limits on executive compensation and severe limits on separation packages.
6) Once the compnay buys back their stock, they can do what they want again.
Report this comment
Total snow job by the Bushies to throw the election.
Report this comment
I'd like to see them consider a less centralized version of this same plan. Rather than have a federal RTC-type organization buy these toxic assets, leave them where they are, and allow their current owners to put them over in a special corner of the balance sheet and not write them off for now.
The solution is time. Time is money. We can buy the time it will take for the toxicicty of the assets to subside (that means, reagain their value, as they surely will over time).
Leave these assets where they are, and allow them to be used as collateral - thereby creating some value for them in the meanwhile - for loans from the government rather than purchase proceeds.
Mechanically, the effect is the same... $700 billion in cash changes hands from the government to these troubled institutions and these toxic assets are pulled out of the profit/loss calculation of otherwise healthy operations. But there would be no actual transfer of ownership, and the government would generate low-risk interest income on its loans, rather than assume the maybe/maybe not risk of possibly recovering value later when the value of these assets recovers.
The government should act as a banker in this deal, not an owner. Ownership has risks and those risks should remain where they are.
Report this comment
Hmmm. Interesting how Pelosi and Company have had control for 2 years and yet they (the people who actually make the laws) didn't fix this mess before it came to a head. The president only signs the law in, it's Congress and Senate that draft the law and vote on it.
It's amazing how many people move to the mantra of "Blame Bush". Truly one of the greatest scams of this new century is how the Democratic party pulls the wool over people's eyes in order to increase thier socialist agenda.
Report this comment
This will go down as one of the biggest "Emperor with new clothes" scams yet perpetrated on the American Taxpayers.
Scream fire loud enough & often enough & people will see smoke & feel heat where there isn't any. We seem to never learn.
Report this comment
Sorry #8, it's the Rethugs who are the new Socialists!
Bush/Plain/McSame = the REAL bridge to nowhere.
Report this comment
OMG, look what McCain did, got a deal together just overnight. Now he will surely win the election. <G>
Scott -- actually, what's amazing is your total lack of understanding of the political process. But, hey, if it makes you feel better, blame it all on a Senate that can't bust a Republican filibuster and a Congress that doesn't have the votes to override a veto by a president who was more than happy to give everything to his buddies when they controlled Congress and absolutely nothing now.
I remember Bush in his first election, his first inaugural speech and his second. His mantra was "I'm the guy who can work both sides of the aisle." He was lying through his teeth and said whatever he needed to win an election.
McCain is no different.
Report this comment