YEY! House declines the $700 billion bill for the $800 billion bill. Nice job waiting for the newer model.
Pork is yummy. What did we get here in Pa? It wasn't the wooden arrows thing, was it?
On a side note: Rep. Pitts didn't vote for it, but Rep. Gerlach changed his vote from a no (Monday) to a yea (today). Both Senators Casey and Specter voted for the bill.
While at this point I think it did need to be passed, I worry that it may have been done too hastily. I'm in the process of reading through the bill right now. It's a lose-lose situation, but it seems to me it'd be better to take the path of an increased deficit and damaged economy than awaiting complete economic collapse.
The oversight bit does bug me, having just read over it. The SEC and the Federal Reserve are, to my mind, corrupt. And new boards are being formed with the people who lead those respective groups gaining immediate control over the new ones as well? It's irksome.
Basically it's 700 billion dollars with a bunch of words attached to it. Complete horseshit. And our congress had to bribed into doing it. Or were bribed into doing it depending on your perspective.
"I will write that program. But only if you promise to decrease taxes on my family." would get my ass in trouble if I were serious, if not fired.
"I voted against a bad bailout bill on Monday, and will now vote for a better rescue plan, not because I like it or want to, but because we fought as hard as we could for more reforms," Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tennessee
"I don't want to have to vote for this bill, and I'm not defending it," ... "It's full of things that I don't believe in." Rep. Sue Myrick, R-North Carolina
That doesn't neccessarily mean that the street hasn't accepted the bailout. The market was previously priced with the acceptance of the bailout. I can't go into details, but I will when I can.
/Restructure the regulations surrounding some of the facets of the market that are actually causing the crazy ups and downs first, then work on your actual plan. //It's a tourniquet, like the bailout, but it doesn't cost 700bn dollars. ///Too late now...
One should also look up the roll call for their congresscritters to see how they voted.
My two senators Bob Casey and Arlen Spector voted Yea and my Rep. Pitts voted Nay.
I already hate Spector for the spectacle he made about steroids in sports... But Bob Casey just took a pretty big hit IMO. Pitts gets knocked up a peg.
Casey was always a tool. He's an unprincipled democrat who often swings to the worst principles of the modern republican party.
In reply to redbone, I will always vote. It is definitely true that one vote will almost certainly change nothing, but it is even more true that no vote will definitely do nothing. There are plenty of awesome candidates out there. Some are even officially running for president. Personally, I will almost certainly vote for Barr, but if he wasn't in the race, I could always write in someone better.
Not voting is simply an acceptance of laziness, which is something I never want to do.
Casey was always a tool. He's an unprincipled democrat who often swings to the worst principles of the modern republican party.
In reply to redbone, I will always vote. It is definitely true that one vote will almost certainly change nothing, but it is even more true that no vote will definitely do nothing. There are plenty of awesome candidates out there. Some are even officially running for president. Personally, I will almost certainly vote for Barr, but if he wasn't in the race, I could always write in someone better.
Not voting is simply an acceptance of laziness, which is something I never want to do.
I second the Barr vote. Too bad everytime I ask someone about voting someone other than the Democrat or Republican candidate all they say is "why would you waste your vote" and all I want to reply with is "because I don't like them, and I like this guy?"
So, the Wallstreet may reject the bill, because it has the potential to hurt the upper crust of the companies. So, now the few things that I liked about the bill are not going to get implemented.
Wait, isn't that a good thing? The bill sucks, and the banks think they can get through the current financial crisis without its help, just as we all want them to do anyway.
OOOOO. Now banks that might not need the help won't just abuse it. Those poor companies.
The market will be fine, we will hemorrhage money for a month or two but people still clearly have money.
The Dow dipped below 9750 for about 2 microseconds before SHOOTING back up to over 9850. People are just gaming it a little differently in light of the crisis. If it's falling, why not let it fall further than you might otherwise. Everyone else is... Then it's cheaper to buy right?
/Let's see how far down the rabbit hole goes. //Maybe I'll be able to afford stock someday after all?
Wait, isn't that a good thing? The bill sucks, and the banks think they can get through the current financial crisis without its help, just as we all want them to do anyway.
It is... as long as there is no $700 billion dollars being printed/spent. I don't know what congress will do with the bill if no one accepts it.
Markets are on the up atm. Apparently the fact that our government is willing to give companies "loans" without having to adhere to the executive compensation part of the bailout bill made some execs more willing to sell.
/no golden parachute, but free reign over taxpayer money as long as you work there... sweet. //Maybe I should just be happy for them and move on with my life. ///Been thinkin about Sirius XM stock.