posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 09:41 AM
What *I* fail to understand in the whole mess is simply this:
How is it, the best option is one lacking oversight?
Isn't this why we're in this mess to begin with? We've collevtively decided as a nation that, the best fix to a credit squeeze/financial
dryup/valueless securities due to a lack of regulation and oversight is to procure stability through legislation lacking exactly the same.
One of the biggest problems TRULY facing us, IMHO, is that we have an EXTREMELY complacent population with respect to their own financial well-being
and fortitude that would otherwise allow them to mitigate economic "bumps in the road". Our older generations had a grasp on this to a more
unwaivering degree than this generation does. We have allowed ourselves to be SUCH a well entertained society, SUCH an uneducated society, SUCH an
uncaring (uncaring to the degree that we believe that our Big Brother will always do precisely what's right for us) society, that I dare say we've
brought this upon ourselves. For all intents and purposes, we were proactive in our demise; had we only needed to be REactive I'm fairly certain we
may have weathered this storm with some grace.
The bailout will certainly work, unfortunately for all the wrong people. The little guy will absolutely take it on the chin on this one. The big guys
who created/were active in/proponents of the now failed economical model have mostly disappeared yes, but not before "cashing out". The one's who
remain will still be sitting high in their respective perches and watch us, the little guy, throw bad money after good to them, all in an effort to
ensure THEIR financial well-beings. Why would we do this? Because they are so empowered with the Government, the media, and within our own minds
simply due to our lack of knowledge on the banking and financial world that we will be left with no choice but to BELIEVE that they absolutely have
our best interest in heart and to let THEM fail, would mean to let EVERYTHING fail.
At some point, though, we must truly ask ourselves DOES the cost outweigh the benefit? My personal opinion on this matter is that the cost FAR
outweighs the benefit of the bailout. I find it incomprehensible that the newly created Federally Funded and oversight arm of this new "Financial
Face" would fight SO hard on obtaining the lowest possible prices for these illiquid assets to get them for $.50 on the dollar or less THEN,
imagining that they DID, to find a buyer for them at ANY time in the near future who would find them desirable, I mean, lets face it, they WERE bad
for a good reason. Within that, if they DID push too hard to garner such low initial cost, the originators may find it absurd to actually relinquish
those assets. Were that the case, then the bailout money that's available to actually buy them is just as worthless and we don't move from our
current position any more than if the bailout package hadn't been approved at all.
Perhaps the only answer is, like in legos when your master creation goes awry, just break em all down and hope for the best on the next one.