'Great progress' in US bail-out , page 1

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times

Topic started on 28-9-2008 @ 10:39 AM by Realtruth

'Great progress' in US bail-out

news.bbc.co.uk

Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said "great progress" had been made - but details remain to be agreed.

A vote could be held in the House of Representatives as early as Sunday, with negotiators keen to reassure the markets before they reopen on Monday.

The deal proposes that the government would spend the $700bn to buy up bad mortgage-related debts from US banks, borrowing the cash from the money markets by issuing more government debt.

(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 10:39 AM by Realtruth

Are we being sold out? If you were in debt because of really bad and corrupt decisions made, who would bail you out?

I am not sure what to make of all this, but if this does pass it is only a band-aide on the massive problem.

What next?

When do the voices of the majority of US citizens and the rest of the world get heard?

My analogy of this situation. A company sells faulty cars to its customers, knowing all the time that it is profiting, and sooner or later they will go out of business, then ask for a bail out from the same people they sold the cars to. WTF!

Is this flawed logic or just outright greed and arrogance?

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 28-9-2008 by Realtruth]

reply posted on 29-9-2008 @ 06:22 AM by shockedonlooker

This is nothing more than a verbal *nudge* if you will to make us more "accepting" of this bill. I found it odd that Pelosi, in her speech yesterday first said " later IF this bill passes..." then immediately corrects herself and says "later WHEN this bill passes...". As if it is already decided before the "vote", which wouldn't surprise me.

Pelosi speech

@ about 6:04

[edit on 9/29/2008 by shockedonlooker]

reply posted on 29-9-2008 @ 06:41 AM by Karlhungis

reply to post by shockedonlooker

No kidding. They don't care what the people want or what the economists think, they will ramrod this down our throat for "our own good". This should be a nice large step toward finally abolishing the middle class. Finally we can have a simple division between the classes, the haves and the have-not's, the working class and the elite.... etc.

What has Pelosi done that would make you think that she cares one bit about what the people want?

reply posted on 29-9-2008 @ 07:11 AM by shockedonlooker

Originally posted by Karlhungis
What has Pelosi done that would make you think that she cares one bit about what the people want?

You mean that part about how "The party's over" didn't grab you? The insurance idea wasn't the clincher? What a joke.

If this deal goes though, I have no doubt in a few months they'll be rifling through our pockets again. I know it would hurt to just let them stew with a NO answer, because we'll all suffer in that scenario, but would it really be ANY WORSE that for them to get the bailout, where we all again collectively suffer? I say bring on the pain as long as those idiots have to take theirs.

It feels like a one, two punch thing, second punch comes later, around Christmas time or sometime after new President takes office, and you know how much better off we'll be by then

reply posted on 29-9-2008 @ 08:31 AM by jmdewey60

I was just looking at the current vote count in the House and it said there were 14 Democrat votes No and almost all the Republicans were in the No group. Right now, it looks like a no. I am sure they will play every trick in the book to force votes until they get what they want.
Apparently, Pelosi saying that they will wait 24 hrs. to vote on it was a lie because that would mean they would have to hold off until tomorrow. They are going to push it through today.

[edit on 29-9-2008 by jmdewey60]

reply posted on 29-9-2008 @ 08:38 AM by Britguy

Originally posted by jmdewey60
I was just looking at the current vote count in the House and it said there were 14 Democrat votes No and almost all the Republicans were in the No group. Right now, it looks like a no. I am sure they will play every trick in the book to force votes until they get what they want.
Apparently, Pelosi saying that they will wait 24 hrs. to vote on it was a lie because that would mean they would have to hold off until tomorrow. They are going to push it through today.

[edit on 29-9-2008 by jmdewey60]

Perhaps that's why the document page count is climbing? They need to add enough earmarks / pork in order to get the buggers to vote yes.

reply posted on 29-9-2008 @ 08:53 AM by jam321

reply to post by jmdewey60

Pelosi been playing politics with this from the word go. In the house alone she has the votes without reps help. In the Senate their are I believe 51 Democrats. I am not sure if they need a simple majority or 60 to pass something. If they need a simple majority she has the vote period. If they need 60 then they need the help of 9 reps in the Senate. The vote isn't as far out as she makes one to believe. Look at how many Democrats and Republicans in house and senate and what is needed to pass legislation to see for yourself.

reply posted on 29-9-2008 @ 09:00 AM by ProfEmeritus

reply to post by jam321

Pelosi been playing politics with this from the word go. In the house alone she has the votes without reps help. In the Senate their are I believe 51 Democrats. I am not sure if they need a simple majority or 60 to pass something. If they need a simple majority she has the vote period.

The bill only needs a simple majority to pass in both the House and the Senate, since Dictator Bush has already said he will sign anything they send him.
The reason she wants some Republicans "on board" is so WHEN the bill FAILS to HELP, the Democrats aren't the ONLY ones blamed. Believe me, THIS BILL WILL FAIL TO FIX ANY PROBLEM. It will only make it worse.
This is the equivalent of giving a drug addict ONE MORE dose of his drug, hoping it will end his addiction.

Pages: ^^TOP^^