Bailout Coming??
Kudlow is reporting that Bush is potentially on board a massive Barney Frank/Chris Dodd subprime mortgage bailout. This is a terrible idea in every way, except, of course, as an election year political gambit. Truly disgusting that Bush would let this through. Although, if you take the election year fatalist view that Kudlow does - "there is no stopping a Frank/Dodd locomotive" - then the only question is what can you get for it in exchange. Kudlow mentions a repeal of the Community Redevelopment Act. Way to aim low Larry. How about making the dividend and capital gains tax cuts permanent? The stock market has been relatively free and clear of the recklessness that took over the mortgage market; and, now we are going to stick it to solid, dividend paying companies while we bail out real estate speculators and the purveyors of toxic debt? There is almost no way to make this $400 billion bailout palatable, but if we have to swallow this turd we ought to demand to wash it down with something nice.
posted by Donny Baseball at 1:49 PM
6 Comments:
Bush is just a reflection of the decline of the GOP. In the final analysis, there is no difference between the GOP and the Dems, or for that matter, all politicians. It's depressing.
Is this "bailout plan" going to work? What happens if housing prices continue to fall, say another 50% over the next 12-24 months?
I find hard to believe that housing prices will fall much below their historical trend, which would still be very damaging to many, but clearly there is a floor. If the baoilout is $400 B, $20 B might actually do some bit of good, the rest will get sucked up by fraud, waste, and by the truly undeserving.
And yes, the GOP sucks. But it is worth hanging by them for no other reason than to keep the truly dangerous ideas - universal healthcare, unilateral surrender, Justice Ginsburg, new math, and anything the AFL-CIO wants - at bay.
"And yes, the GOP sucks. But it is worth hanging by them for no other reason than to keep the truly dangerous ideas - universal healthcare, unilateral surrender, Justice Ginsburg, new math, and anything the AFL-CIO wants - at bay."
The GOP needs "the truly dangerous ideas" like fish needs water. It is to the GOP's own interest to keep these ideas alive. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, I would say that the GOP is the best friend of these ideas.
That is half true. The GOP pumps the dangerous ideas of the other side up alot to seem like a good option. But I truly think that prominent leaders on the Dem side are so truly ignorant of economics and/or so truly committed to statist/collectivist answers to every real and perceived problem, that the GOP has a legit claim to be the party to keep a lid on dangerous experiments with our way of life.
"the GOP has a legit claim to be the party to keep a lid on dangerous experiments with our way of life."
Well, lets look at the record of who actually implemented some of the "truly dangerous ideas":
- Smoot and Hawley, both Republicans, gave us the great depression
- Herbert Hoover, Republican, a protectionist and micromanaged the economy
- Richard Nixon, Republican, gave us cap gains tax, AMT, price control and stagflation.
- George W. Bush, Republican, gave us the Sarbox
Look, the Dems had plenty of chances to implement some truly dangerous ideas but didn't do it. Why? Because they would lose political leverage if they did. They are the enemy of these truly dangerous ideas; just like the GOP is the best friend of the AMT. It's all so desgusting. Modern politics is a dirty, dirty, dirty, game.
TS- all good points. I tend to dismiss party actions of previous generations. Parties and people tend to morph. If I was born in a different time, I might very well have been a Truman Democrat. That Hoover gave us Smoot-Hawley does not alter the fact that Hillary wants to give us universal health care.
Post a Comment
<< Home