Why not give the 700billion$ BailOut to the people?

I think thats a very good question.

Why not bail out the american people? We could really use that 700 billion $ package.

Then we could actually Solve this debt crisis. By paying off all our debts.

Dont get me wrong, I dont think anyone should bail anyone out. But if the govt is gonna fork over 700 Billion Dollars $ for a "bail out".

Why not give the $$ back to the taxpayer who is struggling these days?

Why doesnt anyone ever bring this up?

Seriously if we are going to be talking about bailouts, lets talk about the most important group that needs it the most, the Public.

Just think of what that would do for the economy, if the govt bailed the people out, instead of these sleazy corporations. Everything would change , people could pay off some of their debt ( The basis of the credit crunch crisis in the first place).

It just shows me how this entire "economy" discussion in the media is a sham. They dont even look at the actual way to solve the crisis, they only look at ways to give their buddys more $$$ and plunder the coffers of the american taxdollars.

Thats why its a conspiracy, because if you really wanted to fork out 700 billion $ to Someone, to solve this financial crisis we are in, the Logical solution would be to divide that 700 billion evenly among every american citizen.

700b $ / 300m ppl = 2300-2400 $ each.

And lets say u wanted to be even more effective in ur distrubution , and lets say we only give the funds to those Below Poverty line.

We could up it to give needy citizens like 5000 $ each approximately.

That 5000 $ sure could pay off some of that debt.

The debt that in fact, caused the credit crunch in the first place , lol.

Because we wouldn't be good little slaves anymore? If you think about it all of us around the world we're nothing more than corporate and political cattle in these peoples eyes.

Because the U.S government doesn't give a damn about the public/average civilian and never will.
They only know how to take.

To come to think about it, what does the U.S gov do for it's people besides take taxes and allow them live? I saw Bill Clinton on Letterman lastnight, they were boasting the great U.S health care plan thats one of the best in the world they claim using %16 of the budget on health care.
But here in Canada we have free health care for everyone so wtf?

I don't live in U.S so I don't know, but it doesn't seem like the U.S government does much at all for their people.
It seems the ones helping most are non government funded organizations in the community.


[edit on 23-9-2008 by buds84]

If you're handing it out, don't forget to send some of it my way. A couple of hundred grand should do it.

Ill even take it in US $ even though its not worth much these days

This is exactly right and would be tremendously better on everything.
I thought about this a while back but was unsure of what i didn't know and how that would effect everything.

This would mean the people could KEEP there houses (if even for a little while longer) and have somewhere to live.
This would spark up a growth in the economy everywhere.
This could even make Big Oil some money since people would have the extra to buy gas to actually go to work.

The only drawback is that it would increase inflation but more money increases inflation no matter who you give it too.

I live in east tennessee and the economy is just simply dead, walk into Walmart at lunch time and you might see 30 people total.
Go to the unemployment or temp service locations and you see crowds everywhere.

The only reason I can guess why there giving the money to the ones with 10 digit bank accounts is they get a kickback in there own somehow within the entangled mess of the gov.

Oh my, what a fine idea!

I was thinking about this yesterday!

The bailout money could be divided to those in most need who are definately NOT lazy and are forced to do the slave/slob work that the elite upper class and "living above their means middle class" covet only for themselves.

Consider - the most money could be given to those working 30 hours or more a week making less than 1,300.00 a month including those who are working less than 30 hours a week but in pursuit of looking for full time employment. And say a lesser portion could be given to those who make more on the job a month.

Let's say the bailout money granted could only be used to pay off student loans, medical/dental bills, a used car loan and/or credit cards where there is proof in the bill statement that at least 75% of the credit card use was done to purchase gas, groceries and make utility bill payments.

May God bless you for having posted this! =)

I agree. I for one don't want to have to pay for these big bank guys when we have to struggle every single week on whether we want to keep the power hooked up or eat. I know life's not fair, but come on, send all that money to the struggling taxpayers to be able to keep their houses and let all the big fatcats worry about their own houses being foreclosed on or if they have the money to pay their own power bill.

This is the most brilliant abstract-level thinking I've heard in a LONG time. It's OUR money, anyway, so why not take it back? [color=Red]WE DIDN'T GAMBLE in the marketplace and lose, the financial dweebs did.[/color] We work our fingers to the bone, and for WHAT!?!? More war? More inflation? More debt? More hatred? More starvation? More ignorance? More manipulative media and propaganda? Not me, brother. I'm a Libertarian. I'll just stop paying my taxes, live off the farm, and hunker down for a hell of a fight. I recommend everyone does the same.

I'd like my taxes back in a stimulus package. Your idea has my vote.

reply to post by muzzleflash

---

Funny I was thinking about this on the way to work this morning.
It would be the trickle up theory. People could pay their mortgages and their debts and be happy.
The money would go to the banks and they would be happy.

now I am no way even close to ever being an economist, but it made sense to me.

Then with the personal debts eliminated, this frees up income for people to go shopping again.

And what kills me is why are the truck drivers who keep this economy moving having their fuel subsidized?

reply to post by muzzleflash

---

i agree in principle...but not in the method of a cash payout.


the gov't has the right idea... to rectify the mortgage mess out there.

leave the mortgage-holder companies struggle to survive...

I say about $200B is all that will be needed to start getting rid of the mortgage paper that is clogging the markets
use that $200B to go about the process of making all those stupid and morally reprehensible, bleed-the-sucker-dry mortgages the clever and bonus minded mortgage lenders passed off on the unawares.

Perhaps a lot of the laid-off & fired brokers & wall street technicions that helped market those toxic-debt-instrumenrs (mortgages) can do start-up business to but the bad paper at the 'firesale' price, get the loan restructured more favorably, then sell the new product to a new 3rd party mortgage holder...be they a financial firm or a private entity.
~poof, problem solved...and the unemployment does not increase, and hundreds or thousands of new mortgage processor companies are created
which reflects the American way of solving a impasse/problem.


Yes, a very slow process, of 'correcting' all those rip-off loans to people in a marginal financial position (who grabbed at the elusive brass-ring of the American Dream)...now if the several million loans gone bad are strangling the housing-credit rollovers of monies... then getting rid of all those unregulated, non-conforming mortgage loans, with restructured mortgages to the tens of millions of home-buyers would be the logical method to a solution.
~ but that model of thinking isn't on the table, yet ~



We sure don't need to plunk a sizeable stash of $700Billion in front of the creators of the mortgage messes.
Those who OK'd the issuance of those toxic, mutant mortgages should face investigation & trial for 'economic terrorism',
I remind yoou...just as the Patriot Act lays out...=> .
{..a terrorist act includes the disruption of normal government functions in daily life....}



think about it, people



[edit on 23-9-2008 by St Udio]

It's a good question, but the problem lies in the fact that most Americas would blow the money on things they don't need, like new TVs, computers, even drugs. Debt, well, they'd just be at the same level they were before.

It's easy, especially easy for below poverty line people to look at the money (5 grand) as money they didn't have before, so they are "breaking even" if they blow it all. Sure, some of us would be responsible with it, but to give it to Wall Street ensures that people KEEP their mortages from hitting astronomical rates, their car loans, etc, etc. ATLEAST for a little while longer. This is no "bail out" plan. This is a "buy time" plan.

Places like AIG have near a trillion dollars in assets, those are assets like homes, and cars, etc.

So, all in all, that's why it isn't going to be combined as part of a stimulus package. The money isn't just buying wall street time, it's buying the whole country time.

Our country sold out.

reply to post by gjs4786

---

thats pure assumption and over-generalization

you could set up a system where only debts can be paid off with the package money

as it is now, if you give that 700billion $ to wall street, you will NEVER see it agian

and to top it off, it will only give Incentive to the top dogs to think they can pull this same scam agian, in a few years.

next time they will be saying "we need 1.2trillion dollars to fix it"

what im trying to say here is that wall street doesnt even DESERVE this money

the people worked for the money its theirs lol.

and i know the people would rather have their own money back, than to give it to these corporations who will only squander it

but see how the govt works, they dont even Ask the people what we think should be done with our 700billion $ (huge amount of cash)

hell why not pay off some of our debts to china?

i could give you 100 betters ways to spend 700 billion dollars.

this "bail out" is probably the worst possible way to spend that much money

its more like "HIghway Robbery" IMO

1) Give the $ back 2 the people in a True stimulus package
or 2) pay off debts to china
3) turn our healthcare facilities into the best in the world
4) rennovate our educational system
5) take man to mars and establish a outpost on the moon
6) free water/electricity for everyone for 5years
7) enough food to feed the world for a few years

there is just so many better ways to spend 700bn $
just think of the endless possibilities

heck even if you told me you wanted to make a life-size replica of the pyramids of Giza,but out of Icecream or Jello (for only 43billion $ lol)

It would still be a better way to spend the money, than to give it to wall street. Thats all im saying . lol

The solution is really simple. Give the banks their 50 cents on the dollar or most of the future economic value of the loan. Then turn around and refinance the homeowner at 10 cents per dollar above what the goverment pays. It would let the struggling homeowner stay in their home, and in most cases continue to contribute to the economy.

Even write in a appreciation clause, giving a portion of future profits to the goverment and the bank selling the loan. Let the banks claim a portion of these expected future payments on their balance sheets now, to help shore up their capital they lose when they write down the loan.

The goverment at the very least covers their costs with the extra 10 cents. They can get all the money back by selling the new better rated mortgage to private investors or holding it and collecting the principal and interest for 30 years, which we all know brings in at least 2 times the amount of the loan.

Banks get the assets off their books at a fair price and can get back to business as usual instead of circling the drain into bankruptcy.

The only ones who lose would be the vulture investors waiting on the sidelines for their opportunity at fat profits.

It really comes down to the choice of using vulture investors as a capital base, which will end up costing us money and sending the consumer further down the toilet or giving the homeowners a break they probably don't deserve, and having it cost the goverment nothing while promoting renewed economic activity.

It is a gimmee to me. Help those that need it at the cost of those who helped put them in that situation. Everyone wins in the end. The only reason the politicians aren't falling allove rthemselves todo this is because they serve the big money vulture investors and not the people.

Speaking as a (candid?) Brit.

If you don't pay out your loss makers, you will pay for the priveldge of being in debt to someone whom someone else is defaulting on. You will pay for your tax man to follow up your mortgages. You will stop them going bust and having your houses for free. You will stop wild market insincerity. You will stop your economy being right. You will destroy liquidity.

But your country will be yours.

Something we fight against this Labour Government for.

Hi There,

Perhaps I'm being naive here, but instead of this ludicrous bailout to pay for corruption, why not make an adjustment to the mortgages that are in danger?
If a house has been bought at a over-inflated price, and is being paid for with a over-inflated mortgage (profiting the lender, which is why they gave such a mortgage), why not force an adjustment of the mortgage down to a non-inflated and realistic price...which means a reduction down to affordable payments? Why should homeowners suffer due to someone's greed and avarice?

I care not for the bankers and the moneymen whom would suffer with this, for they care not the suffering they impose on the American people...it is in my mind a justifiable loss to them which they should bear. You wouldn't need a $700 billion bailout to do this, and you would attack the virtual debt.

Best wishes

Because we live in a debt based system. If there were no debt, there would be no money. Let me repeat that. If there were no debt, there would be no money.

As all money is "loaned" out. To pay it back means no money would be left to use. Although it would be completely impossible to pay it back because the interest money is never created.

The only real way to fix this system is to get rid of the debt based system.

Why is the federal reserve allowed to create money as a loan? Why can't the government just print the money loan free? And then the money created could be used for the basic services, and the people would have to pay less taxes?

Because then we would no longer be their slaves.

Who are these people who are richer than the entire American country to loan out such money?


"A man in debt is so far a slave. - Ralph Waldo Emerson

"Debt, n. An ingenious substitute for the chain and whip of the slavedriver." -Ambrose Bierce

"Debt is the slavery of the free." -Publilius Syrus

"Debt is the fatal disease of republics, the first thing and the mightiest to undermine governments and corrupt the people." -Wendell Phillips

"Live within your means, never be in debt, and by husbanding your money you can always lay it out well. But when you get in debt you become a slave. Therefore I say to you never involve yourself in debt, and become no man's surety. If your friend is in distress, aid him if you have the means to spare. If he fails to be able to return it, it is only so much lost." -Andrew Jackson

So what do you think we are if we are a nation in debt?

I am no economist -- but my understanding is that the "People" have already taken about 700 billion dollars, by defaulting on their loans.

Specifically a bunch of Americans defaulted on their home loans.

In the USA you can't go to prison for owing money, period. You can walk away from any loan with no consequence except forfeiting your collateral, and giving up your ability to get future loans for a while.

So this is the argument -- the government gives a MAJOR break to the borrowers. Should the lenders also get a similar deal?

Is this correct? Or am I missing something.

just giving the public 4000 dollars each wouldnt solve any problem..

my question is this...if the tax payers are basically buying the banks...then why cant the tax payers have a stake in them from now on...when a bank makes a profit..give it to the people...who 'own' it...

does anyone know...after this bailout..will the tax payer be given shares in these banks?

reply to post by Buck Division

---

no the banks didnt lose 700bn $, they got to confiscate a ton of real estate property

therefore they didnt lose anything

it was the people who defaulted on the loan that lost everything, they lost their house, their credit rating, etc

the guys on wallstreet drive mercedes ferarri porshe , and your trying to say They deserve the bail out? blasphemy lol