Why the bailout MUST happen before next Tuesday

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS Associated Press Writer, Sep 28, 6:20 PM EDT:

Congressional leaders and the White House agreed Sunday to a $700 billion rescue of the ailing financial industry after lawmakers insisted on sharing spending controls with the Bush administration. The biggest U.S. bailout in history won the tentative support of both presidential candidates and goes to the House for a vote Monday.

Funny that - the democrat and the republican candidates both vote the same way.

Amazing, ain't it?

The plan, bollixed up for days by election-year politics, would give the administration broad power to use taxpayers' money to purchase billions upon billions of home mortgage-related assets held by cash-starved financial firms.

This little paragraph has so many lies in it that it bears refuting.

First, the "bailout" "plan" (parenthesis on both words necessary, as it is NOT a bailout, and there is no plan for this to work other than step 1 - take middle class American taxpayer money and give it to the elites), was not bollixed by election year politics - it was held up because we, Americans, have contacted every politician in sight and bombarded them with phone calls, emails and letters.

To suggest that the bailout was held up because of some election year politics is disengenous.

Second, the "plan" does not "give the administration broad power to use taxpayers' money to purchase billions upon billions of home mortgage-related assets held by cash-starved financial firms".

The "plan" gives the FED officials unlimited power to take as much money as they want from our taxpayer monies collected by the government and to distribute it as they see fit.

Third, these are not "home mortgage-related assets held by cash-starved financial firms".

These are loans which were loaned, as well as investments that were made, then together repackaged into pieces of paper and insured to make the gullible buyers buy this shit, then repackaged into other pieces of paper, etc etc until finally no one fucking knows what the phrase "assets" means in this case - the trail to real loans, not to mention to real money and homes and other assets, is so convoluted that no one knows what the fuck all this is.

It's just pieces of paper, really.

Just pieces of paper.

Flexing its political muscle, Congress insisted on a stronger hand in controlling the money than the White House had wanted. Lawmakers had to navigate between angry voters with little regard for Wall Street and administration officials who warned that inaction would cause the economy to seize up and spiral into recession.

You mean that Congress would not just give our money away to some rich fucks to do as they see fit?

They wanted oversight?

No shit?

A deal in hand, Capitol Hill leaders scrambled to sell it to colleagues in both parties and acknowledged they were not certain it would pass. "Now we have to get the votes," said Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., the majority leader.

How do you like that American "liberals" - this is the Democrats pushing for this.

The final legislation was released Sunday evening. House Republicans and Democrats met privately to review it and decide how they would vote. "This isn't about a bailout of Wall Street, it's a buy-in, so that we can turn our economy around," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

It's a buy in.

Great - so really, as an American citizen I want a letter from the government stating my assets that I have just bought. Will I make interest on my new "investment"?

Reid and Pelosi - yes, liberals, they are sooooo different from the Republicans.

Because after the great Democratic sweep in Congress, we withdrew from Iraq and now have national health care... oh wait, nothing like that happened, and our boys are still dying and being maimed in the Middle East.

It's as if the two parties talk differently and posture heroically during the elections, make speeches which highlight their differences and paint their opponents in unfavorable light...

... but when they vote on important legislature - Iraq War, Patriot Act, no public insurance for Americans, broad "security" laws which allow me to wipe my ass with the Constitution as that document is now dead - the two parties vote the same way.

The two parties vote the same way.

Always (on important issues).

There is never a disagreement.

Hell, the leaders of both parties convince the lower level scum and the House Representatives to vote as they say - or else, no funding for you, no cushy job in Washington, and you can go back to being the local town drunk (this time without the prostitutes and coke and parties provided by the lobbies).

So, who do I vote for again?

Pro war, pro Israel candidate number one or the pro war, pro Israel candidate number two?

The plan would let Congress block half the money and force the president to jump through some hoops before using it all. The government could get at $250 billion immediately, $100 billion more if the president certified it was necessary, and the last $350 billion with a separate certification - and subject to a congressional resolution of disapproval.

Wow - Congress is so tough. Such oversight!

Here, take 250 billion. The next 100 billion - only use it if Bush says it is necessary (let me guess....wait for it.... it WILL be necessary in a week or two).

And the last 350 billion Congress will vote on when it's needed (let me guess... wait for it... it WILL be needed in a two to three week period).

The proposal is designed to end a vicious downward spiral that has battered all levels of the economy. Hundreds of billions of dollars in investments based on mortgages have soured and cramped banks' willingness to lend.

So, the banks got into this crisis by lending and making bad decisions on who to lend to and more importantly how to lend. In the hurrah-economy of just a few months ago the banks and, more importantly, investment "banks" (investment banks have nothing whatsoever to do with banking but everything with gaming the system for themselves and their clients, by playing the game called "hedge funds" - funds which are.... unregulated, basically) lend too much and invested too much and now they are in trouble.

So the solution of course is to give them our money, with no penalty or regulation whatsoever, so they can continue as if nothing has happened - to lend again, to invest again, to play their hedge fund games again.

Brilliant!

"This is the bottom line: If we do not do this, the trauma, the chaos and the disruption to everyday Americans' lives will be overwhelming, and that's a price we can't afford to risk paying," Sen. Judd Gregg, the chief Senate Republican in the talks, told The Associated Press.

This is the bottom line - there are no differences between the political parties.

Oh sure - one hates fags, the other one is OK with homosexuality, one is for legal abortion, the other is not - but these are distractions.

This is just smokescreen, the bullshit that you see play out on TV "news" and talk radio and newspapers, with people in this country discussing passionately why one should vote for a Republican or a Democrat.

When in reality... they are very much the same creature.

They are servants of the lobbies - the pro Israel Lobby, which is the most powerful lobby in Washington, but also the pro gun lobby, the insurance lobby, the medicine producing lobby, etc etc etc.

These people do not serve America, and they sure as hell don't serve you (the so called public interest).

They are quite simply bought and paid for, and vote how they are told - from Obama/McCain on down.

But wait there was some good news here?

Executives whose companies benefit from the rescue could not get "golden parachutes" and would see their pay packages limited. Firms that got the most help through the program - $300 million or more - would face steep taxes on any compensation for their top people over $500,000.

It's the small things in life that make me happy, I guess.

Some proponents even said taxpayers could come out as financial winners.

Gregg, R-N.H., said: "I don't think we're going to lose money, myself. We may - it's possible - but I doubt it in the long run."

Yes, see, America - this is in reality a good business deal.

We will not lose money on it; hell, we will probably MAKE money (by we of course I read government, not me and you, but anyways...).

So, having read what Mr. Gregg, republican, has said, I have to ask...

Mr. Gregg, how is paying for the Iraq war and occupation from Iraqi oil going?
After all, the war was supposed to pay for itself because once we stole errr appropriated all that Iraqi oil we wouldn't lose money - hell, we would make money!

How did that work out again?

AmericanGoy prediction:
From the article past, if you read it attentively, you would have gleaned that "Bloody Tuesday" is coming.

September 30, 2008 - that is when investors (mainly foreign, China and Arab, some Europeans, and some private super rich elite alongside Joe Schmoe's like me) have a deadline.

The deadline is this - you can only withdraw money once invested in a hedge fund once per quarter (depends on the fund) and the next withdrawal is this Tuesday - September 30, 2008.

How will this affect the stock market?

Again, I have already linked to this article, but it bears repeating (article is here - and yes, no one read it and I only got 19 DIGGs on it so it bears repeating here):

There’s no relief these days for stock investors, who’ve already seen their portfolios get pounded by the fallout from the now 13-month long credit crisis. Now there’s a new worry for average investors: Bloody Tuesday, which is the deadline for hedge fund investors to put in requests to get their money back by year’s end.

With so many hedge funds—including some very large ones—posting negative returns this year, there’s a big fear that wealthy investors and pension funds are itching to take some money off the table. Many funds limit redemptions to four times a year in order to give managers breathing room to navigate choppy markets. But in order for an investor to qualify, managers generally require investors to submit a request 90 days before the end of the quarter.

Already, the redemption requests have been pouring into hedge funds well ahead of the Sept. 30 deadline. But it’s not uncommon for investors to wait until the last moment to submit a redemption demand. Sources say at some funds investors are seeking to recoup about 10% of their money, which is relatively high. The trouble is that most managers don’t keep too much cash on hand. To comply with their investors wishes, hedge fund managers may have to start selling lots of stocks—a move that could push equity prices even lower in the coming months.

That's how - massive sellouts triggering the stock market's dive into oblivion and Jim Cramer's worst nightmares.

Here is the most important thing though from the article:

It’s important to note that hedge fund managers don’t need to start selling right away. The 90-day window gives them an opportunity to try and persuade investors to change their minds. If stocks were to rally in the coming weeks, some investors might be convinced to sit tight and keep their money put.

THAT IS WHY the bailout needs to happen next week, preferably Monday.

So that all the big institutional investors - China, Saudi Arabia, Europe, the super rich private persons, as well as small scale investors like you and me, people with a measly $200,000 income or less - don't withdraw their money on Tuesday triggering the Second Great Depression.

Glad to be of service to You.

AG out; off to get drunk.