BAILOUT: Yes or No?

[KukriKhan]

First off I'm not exactly the smartest or most informed person on this subject. I'm really trying to be... in a sense and following it when I can. But school is a nice little nag . So please excuse me if my question is a bit ignorant or already been answered in some way shape or form...

My question is,
Since it appears that the US will borrow 700 billion from foreign banks and such, how will this, in the long run, help the US economy and those around the world who are connected to our economy? It will put us further into debt, and the more I think about the current bail out plan (and from what I've heard and read, as I have yet to see the actual details about it), it will just make everything "feel" good now, but bite us harder in the future. I feel like we should have let it collapse and then build it back from the ground up. I know it may takes years and maybe even decades, but I'm looking at how this will work out for future generations.

Your question: "...how will this...help...?" is a fine one, Decker, and one actually not adequately addressed by either the right or left, here, on TV, or in Congress/Administration.

My answer is just my personal opinion: it might not help at all. They're basically gambling that we can spend our way out of the mess by covering (that is: removing from play) bad paper and holding it for awhile, until things (the housing and credit and monetary markets) get better on their own; then slowly re-introducing that bad paper into the system, a little at a time - sort of like an immunization plan for a patient with cancer, who took too much of an anti-cancer wonder drug, but saw his liver and kidneys fail from too much of a good thing. The "doc" has to roll back the dosage, and make the treatment more long term, so the patient survives, AND the cancer goes away, over time. He hopes.

If he fails, and either the cancer, or the drug side-effects, win, the patient dies. And in this case, we go into Great Depression v2.0. No jobs, no credit, no capital, etc.

As to "how it will work out for future generations": you and your kids will be paying for this for about 40 years+. Because if government intervention really is the only way to fix this (and I'm not convinced yet that it is), then $700bn isn't gonna be enough. They pulled that number out of thin air anyway. My ignorant blue-collar best guess would be more in the neighborhood of $2 Trillion. That amount should be about enough to buy up all mortgages that have 2 or more missed payments - which I would define as 'bad paper', and include properties going to auction next week.

Net effect: U.S. Gov't becomes the biggest property-holder, bank, landlord, and insurance company on earth. And how it's all paid for depends on whether we elect the "tax and spend" Dems, or the "borrow and spend" Rep's. Either way it's spending OPM (other people's money - that hasn't been earned yet).

And finally, none of this refers to anything in the Constitution, except that there is some semblance of voting going on.

[Don Corleone]

I'm just wondering if in 3-4 pages of unflinching confrontation, CR & Koga ever considered the possibility that they're BOTH right. That Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac WERE incentivizing people to make loans to people that might not be the most secure risk, but that loan officers were off on a tear and doing well more than anything being asked of them by FM/FM?

Seriously, guys, take it down a notch. Take the 10,000 foot view for a second:

-You have Democrats arguing that in order to save the economy, we must subsidize Wall Street's bad investments. Privatized profits, socialized losses. Does that sound like a Populist stance to any of you?

-At the same time, I would argue, in an even greater departure from their avowed principles, you have Republicans arguing that the only way our credit markets can be resolved is to socialize them. Hmmm....

Similarly, the bill didn't pass for 2 reasons: 1) too many House Republicans dug their heels in and showed some spine (65%) 2) some Democrats showed commitment to their prinicples too, and voted against redistributing wealth upwards (I'd peg that at about 25%).

And yes, I think to a limited degree, Nancy Pelosi getting up and saying "By voting for this bill, you wisely and publicly agree that Republican fiscal policies are a failed joke" was about 10% responsible. That was one of the dumbest political stunts I've ever seen. Or was it? I wonder if she didn't speak to her true feelings and try to sabotage the bill while simultaneously voting for it.

By the way, while we're all patting ourselves on the back and talking about how the responsible taxpayer is going to get shafted by the irresponsible fatcats, how about a little bit of sobering reality for all of us?

-We have a 9.6 trillion national debt.
- The average American taxpayer holds over $12K in unsecured debt (credit cards, educational loans, car loans).
-Over 70% of the government's money comes from the top 10% of wage earners.
-About 40% comes from the top 1%.
-When people talk about "giving" $2300 to each American, that's exactly what it is. Pure redistribution of wealth. The bottom 50% pay less than 3% of their income in taxes.

Seriously folks, let's get real. For all our "soak the rich" talk, we already are. And we're not talking about paying this bill ourselves. We're talking about screwing our kids. We've over consumed the wealth our current 2 generations can produce, and we're now eating into our kid's future earnings. I'm not going to pay for this bailout, Jillian and Allison will, and they're 3 years and 6 mos, respectively!

Any plan that restores us to fiscal conservatism, balanced budgets and $0 debt is good in my book. Which is why I'm thrilled to death that the bailout bill went down, even though it personally cost me about 20% of my retirement savings. And if Koga wants to give me and the other evil Republicans credit for it, I'll at least proudly take my 65% of that credit.

Seriously folks, we should go to Frankfort and study how successful markets are run. While we've been busy playing world cop, the Germans have quietly and successfully transformed themselves into the largest exporter as a percentage of GDP (greater than China!). That used to be what we did.

[HoreTore]

Very good post, Don

But this:

Seriously folks, let's get real. For all our "soak the rich" talk, we already are.

It's sad that certain people still haven't figured out that we can't pay our way out of everything by taxing the rich. If we're going to get anywhere, if we're going to raise any decent amount of money, then sorry, the regular guy has to pay. And by looking at your debt, I'd say you ought to start taxing yourselves... Very soon.

[Don Corleone]

It's sad that certain people still haven't figured out that we can't pay our way out of everything by taxing the rich. If we're going to get anywhere, if we're going to raise any decent amount of money, then sorry, the regular guy has to pay. And by looking at your debt, I'd say you ought to start taxing yourselves... Very soon.

Who are you, and what have you done with my socialistist friend, Hore Tore?

What I forgot to mention in my earlier post, while I was on my rant about how we're all irresponsible...

I want to invoke an image for you. One that's not all that unrealistic.

BankOfAmerica, who's just gobbled up some banks hit by the sub-prime lending losses, actually realizes they over ambitiously absorbed too much loss. Regulators, poring over their books, issue a call for more liquidity of assets against their outstanding loans. Nervous, BankOfAmerica calls on a couple of larger corporate loans they have outstanding. The client bank announces that they have to default, for at least a quarter. Waves of nervousness ripple around the market, and the credit markets tighten even more. The regulators really start putting the screws to BofA, telling them they better produce $18 billion in liquid assets within the next week or start facing some stiff penalties. BofA response? They call the note on unsecured loans they have outstanding. Translation? Your credit card bill comes due. In its entirety. Right now, all credit card balances you hold, come due.

Did you just take a big gulp? Then stop whining about irresponsiblity in the markets, because you are in fact part of the problem. And in the interest of full disclosure, so am I. Which is why Mrs. Corleone and I are making some moves towards liquidity to get all unsecured debt retired within the next 12 months. I strongly and vehemently urge all of you to do what you can to move down the same road. If you have a rainy day fund, well, it's coming down pretty hard right now...

[KukriKhan]

Funny you should mention that, Don. The Kukri household has begun a similar move as of last Friday, on top of moving TSP (the Federal 401(k)) funds into 'safe' Treasuries, and away from stocks.

If we really do have some cash laying about in 6 months (by no means a sure bet), we'll have to decide whether to invest in storeable food, or trying to buy some Federal "fire-sale" foreclosed property. :)

[Lemur]

I live entirely debt-free, and not because I make millions per year. It's a lifestyle thing, trying to consistently live below your means. I can't be the only American who pays his cards down to zero every month, can I?

[KukriKhan]

Nope, you're not alone. We're just trying to get the latest auto loan paid up ahead of time, cuz we wanna keep the car in case we have to escape to the hills or something. :)

[Don Corleone]

Well, I would argue that my current debt is neither smart nor bad debt. It's more of a cash flow thing....

I bought a pellet stove and enough wood pellets to last though the winter. So, in a sense, I already have a savings for that... my budgeted amount for fuel oil this winter will pay off the stove. Add to that some auto repairs and our outstanding car loan (which is still unsecured mind you), it's not like we're going on vacations every month.

If you can pay cash up front for a car, that's great Lemur. I got the best used car rate I'd ever heard of, even less than my mortgage. It was 6.00%, on a USED car.

All of my debts "make sense" on the surface, or at least they did 2 weeks ago. But right now, with the threat of a bank calling the notes on one of them, it doesn't seem all that smart, hence my new found resolution to only pay cash for cars.

[Lemur]

Hmm, if we get to the point where retail banks are calling in performing loans, we'll have bigger problems to worry about. Like how to discourage the leather-clad cannibal biker gangs led by the Lord Humungus.

I think your scenario is extreme.

[gaelic cowboy]

Picked up my free Irish Independant in college today and this greeted me €400 billion bailout of our Irish banks and instituitions. Ireland is 75 time samaller in population terms than USA and yet only this separates the bailout.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Universal Currency Converter© Results
Using live mid-market rates.
Using live mid-market rates. More currencies...
Printed from the XE Universal Currency Converter at: www.xe.com/ucc
Memo: .................................................................................................... ...................................................................

.................................................................................................... ...................................................................

Live rates at 2008.10.01 14:21:17 UTC

400,000,000,000.00 EUR = 560,772,093,676.09 USD

Euro United States Dollars

1 EUR = 1.40193 USD 1 USD = 0.713302 EUR

THE Government last night battled for sweeping powers to allow it to step in and prevent troubled banks from going under.

Following a long day of drama, the full details finally emerged of Taoiseach Brian Cowen’s unprecedented €400bn guarantee to safeguard the country's six banks. But the wide-ranging new laws go far beyond just guaranteeing loans.

New legislation to back up €400bn worth of loan guarantees for banks, introduced to the Dail late last night, gives Finance Minister Brian Lenihan the ability to step in “as he sees fit” to help out with financial support, including loans, guarantees, exchange of assets, and buying up shares.

In effect, the legislation stops just short of nationalising a bank, if the Government thinks it is necessary, as it allows for a stake to be bought up. It also provides for the overriding of competition laws if a merger of a bank is required, similar to a recent case in Britain.

The action taken by the Government in giving €400bn worth of guarantees to six of the main banks prompted a bounce back on the domestic financial market.

However, the numerous delays in introducing the legislation to the Oireachtas were described as a “farce”, and the scale of the legislation sparked concerns on the opposition benches, especially since no reference is made in the law to the pay of chief executives of banks availing of the guarantees. There was also little detail on the level of scrutiny involved or on the amount the banks had to pay to get their loans guaranteed.

The day began with the Government decision to safeguard the Irish banking system being announced at 6:45am and ended with the Dail debate adjourning at midnight.

Mr Lenihan said the move was “in no way a bailout for the Irish financial system”.

“This guarantee is not ‘free’ and the taxpayer who ultimately underwrites this support will be remunerated for the value of the support provided. The terms and conditions on which the guarantee is provided will ensure that the taxpayer gets value for money,” he said.

Fine Gael, Labour and Sinn Fein backed the passing of the law in principle, but wanted their concerns addressed in this morning's debate.

Fine Gael said the specific powers it wanted in relation to regulation of banks was not dealt with. The party also wanted to ensure the legislation was robust and would pass the scrutiny of European Union directives.

Fine Gael finance spokesman Richard Bruton said the Government was seeking to play down the exposure of the taxpayer and the rules were being changed.

The Labour Party said it was alarmed by the lack of detail on how much the banks would have to contribute and wondered if deposits will flood towards Irish banks because of the added guarantees.

Labour finance spokesperson Joan Burton said there was no indication if any limitations would be put on the pay packets of executives in the banks who avail of the guarantees.

“This bill is an extraordinary blank cheque to the Minister for Finance, the Financial Regulator and the Central Bank to offer terms and conditions of support to banks,” she said.

Mr Cowen insisted there would be no exposure of the taxpayer in helping out the banks.

He said the stability of the Irish banking system would have been put at risk if he had done nothing in the face of the liquidity crisis facing Irish banks. The new law, the Credit Institutions (Protection) Bill 2008, was intended to be signed off on by the Dail and Seanad and signed by President Mary McAleese last night.

But debate on the legislation will continue today in both the Dail and Seanad, due to the delays in the drafting of the bill. The bill passed the second stage of the legislative process in the Dail last night and will be completed today.

The Government was forced into crisis talks after a sell-off across the four listed banks on Monday, following a raft of bailouts across Europe over the weekend.

Anglo Irish Bank, whose share price had tumbled 46.2pc on Monday, had borne the brunt of the collapse in confidence, and was understood to be main focus of the talks to avert an implosion in the system. The lender's stock rocketed 67.1pc higher yesterday in light of the Government lifeline.

One trader reported that Ireland may well be seen as the safe haven for European cash and investments after the Government's decision to underwrite the Irish banks.

However, among concerns raised were those voiced by the Financial Services Authority in Britain which suggested that the Irish action had resulted in depositors draining funds from British banks to place with Irish institutions.

There were also concerns that the Government guarantee could fall foul of the European Commission which last night said it would study the details of the guarantees to see whether they constituted illegal state aid.

[gaelic cowboy]

I forget where spoiler tags are cant see em on the thing could anyone take pity

Done. ~Kukri

[Ser Clegane]

I live entirely debt-free, and not because I make millions per year. It's a lifestyle thing, trying to consistently live below your means. I can't be the only American who pays his cards down to zero every month, can I?

Generally I follow the same lifestyle - however, buying/building a house without taking any debt is somewhat difficult (which is why we also have BIG debts now, a couple of months after buying a house).

[Lemur]

Wow, gaelic cowboy, that's some messed-up formatting. The easiest "hide text and give me a button" tag is [ex]. I'll use it below, so that if you're confused, you can just hit "quote" on this post and see how it works.

Hidden text.

[gaelic cowboy]

Thanks man been years since I posted regularly on the board but now I am in college with the free WiFi why the hell not take advantage

[HoreTore]

Who are you, and what have you done with my socialistist friend, Hore Tore?

He's still in favour of taxes

If you can pay cash up front for a car, that's great Lemur. I got the best used car rate I'd ever heard of, even less than my mortgage. It was 6.00%, on a USED car.

I've never had a car-loan and I've always paid my cars in cash. And I'm a student.

Is this where I don't mention that the 3 cars I've owned is an '86 audi 80, '87 mazda 626 and currently a '92 toyota carina II?

[Banquo's Ghost]

Did you just take a big gulp? Then stop whining about irresponsiblity in the markets, because you are in fact part of the problem. And in the interest of full disclosure, so am I. Which is why Mrs. Corleone and I are making some moves towards liquidity to get all unsecured debt retired within the next 12 months. I strongly and vehemently urge all of you to do what you can to move down the same road. If you have a rainy day fund, well, it's coming down pretty hard right now...

Well, we're all being told off. I have listened to several economists recently pointing out that the rich are withdrawing a lot of investment funds which makes the problem worse by reducing liquidity. I have certainly reduced a great deal of exposure to the stock market and moved capital to safer havens. As noted earlier, we did take a very profitable but entirely surprising punt on bank shares before the bailout plan, but that will go some way to paying inheritance taxes in two countries.

I can see this is not the typical problem, but are politicians really expecting large fund-holders to stay in the market?

Anyway, I agree with Lemur - it'll be a very nasty day when responsible loans are called in - not least because by then, you won't need to pay them back to the hollowed husk of a finance system unless it be in sea-shells.

[drone]

I live entirely debt-free, and not because I make millions per year. It's a lifestyle thing, trying to consistently live below your means. I can't be the only American who pays his cards down to zero every month, can I?

I can't say I'm entirely debt-free (I have a mortgage), but I have always paid off my credit cards every month and haven't had a car payment in 12 years. Could I be living in a McMansion with a BMW and an Escalade in the driveway? Probably, but I despise debt. My grandfather lived through the depression, and passed that experience to my father, who passed it to me. I've been railing on my SO to pay down her credit cards, she had a huge balance. Then I computed her annual interest charge and she saw the light.

There is a huge amount of credit card debt out there, and that's probably going to be the next big problem. If the unemployment rate keeps going up, that debt (some securitized as well) will need a "bailout" too. The mortgage bailout is just a dutch boy running out of hands.

If a bailout is going to happen, I'd prefer one like this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...d=opinionsbox1

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The theory underlying the bailout plan stalled in Congress is that rescuing the finance industry will restore market stability and that the benefits will eventually trickle down to average Americans. Thus, solving the subprime mortgage crisis has morphed into a much larger challenge: reassembling the architecture of the financial markets, which seemingly requires giving the Treasury secretary nearly a trillion dollars and extraordinary latitude to pick winners and losers.

There is an easier and more politically palatable fix: Pay off all the delinquent mortgages.

The financial crisis is a liquidity crisis, yes, but it is ultimately a product of homeowner failures to pay. Unless this fundamental problem is fixed, we will continue to see -- and need to treat -- the symptoms. The proposed bailout ignores this. Yet the sum being demanded from taxpayers is almost certainly more than sufficient to pay off all currently delinquent mortgages.

No way should the government be buying derivatives. Go to the source, and actually buy something tangible, instead of some virtual stock.

[HoreTore]

Hmmmm.... Just out of curiosity, how common are credit cards over there?

I've never had one, and I've only wanted to have one once really, when my paycheck was delayed a week....

[Don Corleone]

The problem with that approach, Drone, is that it throws gas on a fire. Homeowners that are delinquent that have the government swoop in and pay their mortgage for them will not all of a sudden find religion. If anything, their neighbors may emulate their behavior. And the banks, that made the bad loans in the first place, won't learn either.

It's the same fundamental solution, it only differs on the methodology for the cash infusion.

As for Banquo and Lemur's comments, I agree that banks calling loans that they are servicing properly is unlikely. It's in their interest to leave that money in your hands (no pun intended). I'm just saying that it's a possibility, and one that's not as far-fetched as it might have been 3 weeks ago.

[Koga No Goshi]

Did you just take a big gulp? Then stop whining about irresponsiblity in the markets, because you are in fact part of the problem. And in the interest of full disclosure, so am I. Which is why Mrs. Corleone and I are making some moves towards liquidity to get all unsecured debt retired within the next 12 months. I strongly and vehemently urge all of you to do what you can to move down the same road. If you have a rainy day fund, well, it's coming down pretty hard right now...

I still think that people are perhaps overestimating how much of this was single home owners and not giving consideration to the fact that a lot of people have ALREADY walked from investment homes they had mortgages on they knew they could never swing long-term. They wanted to just hang on for six months while the house increased in value 10 or 15% and then sell. Those people have already walked and I think even if all the remaining people trying NOT to walk away from a mortgage pulled in every resource and did the responsible thing, the crisis would still exist.

(This is not to say, at all, that what you are doing is not very responsible and admirable, Don Corleone. I just think people like you were not the real source of this problem; you might have been part of it, but the greed and the belief that everyone could make quick short-term turnaround profits on this, not worrying about the long-term, was more of the source.)

[Spino]

I live entirely debt-free, and not because I make millions per year. It's a lifestyle thing, trying to consistently live below your means. I can't be the only American who pays his cards down to zero every month, can I?

You're not... The planets must be in alignment because aside from computer games that's another thing we have in common. Since I paid off my modest student loan in my mid 20s I have been debt free ever since and I also am the furthest thing from a millionaire. Furthermore the only time I have ever carried a balance on my credit card is when I forget to pay on time (I can be quite absent minded about such things). As far as our generation is concerned we are truly rare birds. For all my talk of the evils of Baby Boomers the fiscal irresponsibility of our fellow Gen-X'ers postively puts them to shame.

I'm one of those rare Gen-X'ers who buys most of their food at the supermarket and cooks it at home. I rarely buy anything unless it's on sale, coupled with a rebate or for some reason is selling at an unusually low price. I also refrain from indulging in money draining frivolities like binge drinking at the local pub every Friday & Saturday, gambling or paying for snazzy tech I admire but would admittedly never use, etc. I chalk it up to being raised in no small part by my grandparents, members of the Depression era generation who turned coupon clipping and thriftiness into an art form. Being raised in a Greek household played its part as well... seriously, we rival Jews and Scots for our ability to squeeze the life out of an innocent penny.

I've squirreled away so much cash over the last 20 years that my mattress looks like it's about to give birth to a bank... Interesting that with the looming financial collapse my friends (who live paycheck to paycheck) who previously chastized me for my cheapness have toned down the sermons about 'not being able to take it with you' or 'living in the moment'.

[Koga No Goshi]

You're not... The planets must be in alignment because aside from computer games that's another thing we have in common.

Me too. I got raped by the 18% interest rates using a credit card here and there in college, and getting in trouble. (I was not out buying luxury dinners and electronics with it, I was buying stuff like books and little daily things when I didn't have time to take the bus to the bank for cash.) Since then I live off-debt, my one credit card gets zeroed every month.

I'm one of those rare Gen-X'ers who buys most of their food at the supermarket and cooks it at home.

This part is off topic Spino but this made me really curious. I know this depends a lot on where you live, and everything. But for me, I never found myself, at least for one person, saving any significant amount of money grocery shopping as opposed to eating out. Especially when you take waste/loss/food going back before you eat it into account. I mean, if you go to some bulk membership place, yeah, you save money, but a single person usually can't store or eat all that before it's bad. I tried the buy and cook as a single person, and I just never saw any real savings. I mean you go and spend $7-9 for enough chicken for two meals, (or $20~ for a bigger bag I barely had freezer room for and would get frostbitten halfway through). Now, when money was tight I did live on mac & cheese, pancake mix (creative applications) and top ramen. You can live very cheaply that way, practically like a day laborer. But, you get black circles under your eyes and you're tired and hungry all the time. (I was totally broke my last five or six months of college, as soon as paycheck would come in, it would be gone for necessities.)

I've squirreled away so much cash over the last 20 years that my mattress looks like it's about to give birth to a bank... Interesting that with the looming financial collapse my friends (who live paycheck to paycheck) who previously chastized me for my cheapness have toned down the sermons about 'not being able to take it with you' or 'living in the moment'.

Another way you and I are alike. I have been teased and made fun of for years, called "Scrooge McDuck", because I always cash about half my paycheck and keep it out of the bank. That does mean, that I have an obscene amount of cash money hidden. People made fun, and made fun, and made fun. And now they're not anymore, in fact, now they're saying financial "planners" are telling people to keep about 25% of their money in cash, take it out of CD's, stocks, investments, and keep some on hand in case your bank is locked down for a week while the Feds take it over. No one's making fun of me anymore. :) But I've always had Cassandra syndrome, I haven't trusted the U.S. financial systems in years and I've been saying that I don't see how it can possibly stay stable the way it's running, and everyone called me an alarmist and ignored me for years.

[Mangudai]

You're oversimplifying in the extreme. Nobody is against all regulation, and nobody is for every conceivable regulation. The main divide is that republicans favor only regulation to protect the public safety, democrats also favor regulation to distort price incentives to promote the interests of the underprivileged.

And, your characterization of the differences is very inadequate. The kinds of regulations various different Democrats may support can run the gamut and frequently DO cover issues like safety and public health, rather than just some imaginary oppress-the-whites pro-minority advocacy you seem to be implying.

Your logic is inadequate. I said something like Alice only likes apples, and Bob also likes bananas.
Bob might like apples, oranges and pears. Alice does not like anything except apples.

[Spino]

Me too. I got raped by the 18% interest rates using a credit card here and there in college, and getting in trouble. (I was not out buying luxury dinners and electronics with it, I was buying stuff like books and little daily things when I didn't have time to take the bus to the bank for cash.) Since then I live off-debt, my one credit card gets zeroed every month.



This part is off topic Spino but this made me really curious. I know this depends a lot on where you live, and everything. But for me, I never found myself, at least for one person, saving any significant amount of money grocery shopping as opposed to eating out. Especially when you take waste/loss/food going back before you eat it into account. I mean, if you go to some bulk membership place, yeah, you save money, but a single person usually can't store or eat all that before it's bad. I tried the buy and cook as a single person, and I just never saw any real savings. I mean you go and spend $7-9 for enough chicken for two meals, (or $20~ for a bigger bag I barely had freezer room for and would get frostbitten halfway through). Now, when money was tight I did live on mac & cheese, pancake mix (creative applications) and top ramen. You can live very cheaply that way, practically like a day laborer. But, you get black circles under your eyes and you're tired and hungry all the time. (I was totally broke my last five or six months of college, as soon as paycheck would come in, it would be gone for necessities.)



Another way you and I are alike. I have been teased and made fun of for years, called "Scrooge McDuck", because I always cash about half my paycheck and keep it out of the bank. That does mean, that I have an obscene amount of cash money hidden. People made fun, and made fun, and made fun. And now they're not anymore, in fact, now they're saying financial "planners" are telling people to keep about 25% of their money in cash, take it out of CD's, stocks, investments, and keep some on hand in case your bank is locked down for a week while the Feds take it over. No one's making fun of me anymore. :) But I've always had Cassandra syndrome, I haven't trusted the U.S. financial systems in years and I've been saying that I don't see how it can possibly stay stable the way it's running, and everyone called me an alarmist and ignored me for years.

Checking out the store circulars for weekly deals works for me and I use the supermarket cards to accumulate points that I can cash in to get free food when they have special deals. A few packages of chicken breasts or whole legs, a few packages of vegetables, etc. I scoop up as much as my freezer can handle and stuff it in there for use over the course of the month. I'm not a foodie so even now that I can afford to indulge my palate I generally eat the same thing every other night. To break up the monotony and take a brief vacation from cooking I usually eat out or order out once during the weekends.

I was joking about hiding a ton of cash in my house. A mad money/rainy day fund hidden in the mattress is fine but keeping too much cash on hand is irresponsible in light of the interest (however small) it could be earning in a bank (hopefully a reliable one). I have a nice chunk of change tied up in Roth IRA's with a few high cap/low risk mutual funds with stellar track records but the bulk of my assets are liquid and are in CDs or high return savings accounts in banks that are not in danger of going belly up.

[Koga No Goshi]

I was joking about hiding a ton of cash in my house. A mad money/rainy day fund hidden in the mattress is fine but keeping too much cash on hand is irresponsible in light of the interest (however small) it could be earning in a bank (hopefully a reliable one). I have a nice chunk of change tied up in Roth IRA's with a few high cap/low risk mutual funds with stellar track records but the bulk of my assets are liquid and are in CDs or high return savings accounts in banks that are not in danger of going belly up.

You're one of the people making fun of me! Stop it, stop it! ;)

I don't make a ton of money. And the cash I keep around does have a turnover where I use some of it for out of pocket expenses. So we're not talking about 600,000 in my mattress. Savings account interest though is a joke, to me. And CD's, well, I'm young enough that I don't like tying up my money for 6-24 months in an untouchable place. I like to keep my options open. I have less money (marginally) than someone with the same income as me who put it all in CD's or savings, but, I don't panic or stay up at night worrying what will happen if my bank crashes. It won't affect me for awhile, cash wise.

[Lemur]

Checking out the store circulars for weekly deals works for me and I use the supermarket cards to accumulate points that I can cash in to get free food when they have special deals. A few packages of chicken breasts or whole legs, a few packages of vegetables, etc. I scoop up as much as my freezer can handle and stuff it in there for use over the course of the month.

I cheated -- I married a professional chef. And we grow a lot of our veggies and fruit in our yard, so we get fresh stuff about eight months of the year for the cost of seed.

We bought a second freezer and have been harvesting/vacuum packing/freezing as much stuff as we can. Trying to stretch it out so that we're eating our own produce 12 months of the year.

[Big_John]

And yes, I think to a limited degree, Nancy Pelosi getting up and saying "By voting for this bill, you wisely and publicly agree that Republican fiscal policies are a failed joke" was about 10% responsible.

any representatives who changed their vote based on her speech need to be deported.

[Don Corleone]

any representatives who changed their vote based on her speech need to be deported.

Changed, no. But dragged kicking and screaming to vote for something they don't agree with, then have her fling pooh like that?

[Koga No Goshi]

Changed, no. But dragged kicking and screaming to vote for something they don't agree with, then have her fling pooh like that?

If this really had any effect on the vote, at all, then Republicans have no room to ever accuse anyone of petty partisanship and playing politics.

But, I think it more likely they just didn't want to vote for it before re-election and used her as a scapegoat for the vote.

[Don Corleone]

Come on. If George Bush had stated "And because the Democrats left the White House so woefully unprepared to prevent such an attack, and their failed foreign policy invited Al Queda to breed in Afghanistan, we must now go in and drive their Taleban hosts out of Kabul", do you really think a single Democrat would have voted for the Afghanistan resolution?

If I agree to go along with something I don't like, and somebody stands up and says "And by going along, you're admitting just how wrong and stupid you were for disagreeing in the first place", I'm going to take issue.

Now, I view the failed vote as a GOOD thing, so I don't feel a need to defend them. But I do think you guys are expecting an awful lot of people. They have to vote for something they don't like AND publicly lick Nancy's boots?

Like I said, I think she did it on purpose.