Gary I couldn't agree with you more. Why can't people see what this bill for what it is...a shit sandwhich for the US taxpayer. We'll be a lot worse in the long run if this bill passes. Everyone is so shortsighted. Eventually we will all have to pay for our gross overconsumption on credit.  All you can do as a voting taxpayer is let your congressional leaders know where you stand on the legislation. I wrote my senators and representatives and hopefully they'll vote representing my stance.

 I get tired of debating with people who think you can max out a credit card and not have to pay it back at some point in the future. The US government is a credit card that's close to being maxed out. Are people not listening to economists like Nouriel Roubini, Alan Meltzer, John Makin, Robert Schiller, ect, ect, ect. Has anyone seen the documentary by David Walker titled IOUUSA. Other 3rd world countries have gone down this path of having huge current account deficits and the story doesn't end with a happy ending. I spoke with Gary in Hilton Head and he said "how could it not". This was in reference to the US ending up like Argentina or Mexico. It's very tough to see things in the future being bad when we've had it so good for so long. It's close to the definition of insanity to do what others have done in the past and expect different results. We will have to wait and see how the economic landscape looks in September 2010. 

We bought our first house in Feb. 2006 and moved in that same year. Since it was our first house we got an interest only loan with an arm of 3 years. This sounded like a great deal at the time.The arm is up in July 2009. Our home price has dropped 40-50% and we have put in $70,000.....in interset. My husband just called our company that holds our mortgage, Indy Mac, and asked what they could do to help us. We have never been late, we have excellent credit scores but yet they cannot do anything. We asked what would happen if one of us lost our jobs? What about if we moved to a different State for work? What if we just walked away from our house? She told us to refi - WHAT - refin what?? Nothing. NOTHING - they will help us in NO way. Am I correct in saying that we as tax payers bailed this company out and they will now not help us?? She told him to call back the first week in October AFTER the $700 billion bailout happens and then maybe, MAYBE they will be able to do something.

This makes me ill! We both have good jobs and make good money. We own another home in another State too.We can afford our home now but what happens when the arm comes up next July? What will rates be then? Will our house even be worth the 70k we put into it?

Any suggestions would be great - thank you!!

Regardless of your opinions on whether we should have a bailout or not, it is a moot point. The decision is not up to us. It is out of our hands and in the hands of those we voted for or did not vote for. Such is the representative democracy that we live under, for better or for worse. So rather than spend time bitching, whining, or blaming, start learning how to adapt to whatever changes come down the pipe and take the necessary actions to continue living this adventure we call life. Oh and get out and vote for those that you would entrust in making life changing decisions in the next administration. And if it really bothers you, then run for a public office yourself and try to be one of those that make the 700 billion dollar decisions.  

@fjblau - 

@ShooterSteve - 

@breezygiant01 - http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/09/bush-called-for-reform-of-fannie-mae.html

 Here is the link, they are many other similar posts with similar information that the media just chooses to ignore.

@breezygiant01 -  Though the above link is a blog, the list of requests posted is from the white house press release.

@fjblau - http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/09/bush-called-for-reform-of-fannie-mae.html 

check it out

From Bloomberg:

``I think the Treasury will pay back the $700 billion and make a considerable amount of money,'' Buffett said, adding that if he had $700 billion on the government's terms to buy distressed assets, he would. ``Unfortunately, I'm tapped out.''

Also from Bloomberg:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=af.N94xglmSk&refer=home

http://wingod.newsvine.com/_news/2008/09/18/1882860-bush-attempt-to-rein-in-fannie-and-freddy-opposed-by-congressional-democrats-2003

Here - more stuff, sorry democrats. Someday we can vote for the person rather than the party when the politician can do the right thing for America rather than just to oppose the party. Nancy Pelosi is the perfect example of a Politician willing to hurt America just to blame the other party. Republicans just seem to be more for the country than the party IMO.

@fjblau - right on!

@fjblau - 

It actually goes back further 2003 Again here http://wingod.newsvine.com/_news/2008/09/18/1882860-bush-attempt-to-rein-in-fannie-and-freddy-opposed-by-congressional-democrats-2003

We have had Demo's in the office in the last 50 years, post something substantial. These guys are doing their best to prevent a real meltdown that The bush administration tried to reform. They knew, we have smart smart guys up there, back to Alan Greenspan, they tried to address this. This needs to pass, it will hurt less, much less.

@jacksonwholephoto - Obviously Buffet wants the bailout to go through because he's going to benefit. No person in the banking industry is going to say this bailout is a bad idea. Moral hazard only works if the bad behavior is punished. In a free market risk can be rewarded or punished. I've made both good investments and bad investments in my life and have the positive and negative returns that go with it. You have to take the good with the bad. Goldman Sachs was going to end up like Lehman and Bear without the cash infusions.

Here's some links to help form an opinion.

If you missed last night's discussion on the "vote of confidence" deal from Warren Buffett, you are missing the big picture. Go read:  Berkshire to GS: "I Got $5 Billion, but Its Gonna Cost Ya."

The headline writers of both the NYT and the WSJ missed the numbers involved:

NYT: Buffett Deal at Goldman Is Seen as a Sign of Confidence

WSJ:  Move by Famed Investor's Is Seen as a Vote of Confidence in Crisis-Stricken Banking System

Doug Kass goes last night's analysis one better, and notes that using a Black Scholes produces a valuation of $2.8 billion dollars for the warrants. That makes the effective yield over 20% on the preferred purchase.

As we noted last night, this is terrific for Buffett, who smelled blood in the water. Its a tough deal for Goldman, who were a) obviously in a bind for capital; and 2) smart enough to learn from Lehman Brothers mistakes

What I'm tempted to say (merely to point out that playing the blame game -- regardless of who wins in November -- will solve nothing...and that the only way to emerge is to work together somehow)...would probably get me banned from this blog.  So...I'm just gonna resist the temptation and hope that everyone has a nice day.  Go spend time with your families / loved ones...I know that's what I really need to do.

@ShooterSteve - Earlier this year Merrill Lynch was cleaning up their balance sheet and sold assets for 22 cents on the dollar and had to provide 75% of the financing just to get this deal done. Also in the fine print was a clause stating that if the assets are worth less than 22cents that Merrill Lynch would bear the loss. Common sense indicates to me that maybe the whole financial system has this type of toxic paper on their books. My guess is we'll have the taxpayer buy this toxic paper for 70 cents on the dollar when it's actually worthless. Remember if something has value that can be reasonably determined then there's a market for it. THERE'S CURRENTLY NO MARKET FOR THESE TOXIC ASSETS, THAT'S WHY THEY WANT TO SELL THEM TO THE TAXPAYER.

Here's part of the article below: Have a Good One Steve

Merrill said late Monday it was selling repackaged mortgage-backed securities for $7 billion _ just weeks after they had been worth $31 billion, giving them a current value of about 22 cents on the dollar. Analysts believe that sets a new and very low benchmark that other Wall Street banks _ including Citigroup Inc., Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., Morgan Stanley, and JPMorgan Chase & Co. _ might have to meet when valuing their own investments.