Conquer Club

are you for it or against it?

Against...it will not solve the crisis and may only buy a short period of time before the system implodes. I also consider it a threat to bankrupt the world market with a ransom demand.

I am FOR the BailOut! Thank you so kindly for supporting the Empire of the AntiLuns! You shall never regret having done so. I can now focus my efforts on getting rid of the torture/rape rooms in Canada and locating the WMDs in the jungles of the Amazon!

I have you to thank for letting me be your Overlord and Slavemaster!

Why should we stop at 700 billion dollars? We could just keep going and going like the Energizer Bunny!

You are all such good little slaves, you deserve better than what you have right now...perhaps you guys can start licking my boots. I might throw you a shiny nickle for your loyalty to the Empire of the AntiLuns!

For, it's essential. Just look at Japan, ok?

And I'm so tired of DaGip. Seriously. Get a new idea, for the love of god.

Spuzzell wrote:For, it's essential. Just look at Japan, ok?

And I'm so tired of DaGip. Seriously. Get a new idea, for the love of god.

Your are a commie pinko scrub. The AntiLunsers will come for you in the middle of the night, round you up, and carry you off to some camp in a far away foreign country.

DaGip wrote:

Spuzzell wrote:For, it's essential. Just look at Japan, ok?

And I'm so tired of DaGip. Seriously. Get a new idea, for the love of god.

Your are a commie pinko scrub. The AntiLunsers will come for you in the middle of the night, round you up, and carry you off to some camp in a far away foreign country.

thats a good one.... very funny.... well im against.
DaGip why dont you just make one superthread for yourself, post all your....witty....coments on there and talk to yourself for hours on end.

Totally against it, though, honestly, I don't really mind that it got passed. Sure I prefer capitalism, as is portrayed by my nay vote, but socialism is a completely viable economic strategy. And who knows, we might pull a China in another 70 or 80 years and revert back to capitalism. Whatever.

Still, I think that if it even solves the problem now, it'll make the problem come back in 50 years and possibly worse.

As I like to say, everyone loves a free market until it comes and bites them in the ass.

An option for "economics is a field of study that I do not pretend to understand" would officially have one vote right now.

Neoteny wrote:An option for "economics is a field of study that I do not pretend to understand" would officially have one vote right now.

Hey. Senators and Congressmen don't get that choice, so neither do you.


Incidentally, if you want an idea of what economists think about such things, check out the Dilbert Blog or google Scott Adams survey of economists.

Definitely not a good long term solution. Hardly a good short-term one either as far as I'm concerned. 700 billion is a lot of money.

Just George Bush's final allowance of the corporations eating at the public tax dollar trough

Hologram wrote:

Neoteny wrote:An option for "economics is a field of study that I do not pretend to understand" would officially have one vote right now.

Hey. Senators and Congressmen don't get that choice, so neither do you.


Incidentally, if you want an idea of what economists think about such things, check out the Dilbert Blog or google Scott Adams survey of economists.

I can tell you what makes the most sense to my biologically oriented mind, but that won't necessarily hold certain in the real world. I think Ben Stein is a kook, if that helps.

On Dilbert, I have reason to believe that Scott Adams is also a kook, but no reason to believe that this influences his economics education or views on the field. However, I can admit that my capacity to discern such is diverted by the majority of my intellectual focus being centralized elsewhere...

Pedronicus wrote:are you for it or against it?

If it helps out Juan or DaGip I'm against it.

Nice little CSPAN vid, please listen closely:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLFALYfbsWI

i voted good idea at the start of this thread, but its just a case of sticking your finger in the dyke. Which in hindsight makes it a bad idea. something had to be done to try and free up interbank credit.
If anymore money is to be throw at the problem, then it's already been a waste of time.
The people who came up with 700 billion didn't really know how much exactly was needed, and the delay in getting it passed has made the 700 billion not enough. So it's probably all a waste of time now anyway.

Pedronicus wrote:i voted good idea at the start of this thread, but its just a case of sticking your finger in the dyke. Which in hindsight makes it a bad idea. something had to be done to try and free up interbank credit.
If anymore money is to be throw at the problem, then it's already been a waste of time.
The people who came up with 700 billion didn't really know how much exactly was needed, and the delay in getting it passed has made the 700 billion not enough. So it's probably all a waste of time now anyway.

The first bill was for 700 billion, but after the Senate got a hold of it, they added another 150 billion! Then the freakin' House decided to vote it in! Go figure...

Didn't like the first bailout plan. Haven't fully read the second one but still don't like what I see.

If anyone cares to read all 451 pages.

http://banking.senate.gov/public/_files/latestversionAYO08C32_xml.pdf

AceArtemis wrote:If anyone cares to read all 451 pages.

http://banking.senate.gov/public/_files/latestversionAYO08C32_xml.pdf

You are my hero!

Neoteny wrote:

Hologram wrote:

Neoteny wrote:An option for "economics is a field of study that I do not pretend to understand" would officially have one vote right now.

Hey. Senators and Congressmen don't get that choice, so neither do you.


Incidentally, if you want an idea of what economists think about such things, check out the Dilbert Blog or google Scott Adams survey of economists.

I can tell you what makes the most sense to my biologically oriented mind, but that won't necessarily hold certain in the real world. I think Ben Stein is a kook, if that helps.

On Dilbert, I have reason to believe that Scott Adams is also a kook, but no reason to believe that this influences his economics education or views on the field. However, I can admit that my capacity to discern such is diverted by the majority of my intellectual focus being centralized elsewhere...

No, he hired an independent survey of economists on the presidential election out of his own pocket. He had no hand in it except that he payed for it and reported it. It's strictly a cross-section of the views of economists. Another reason I'm voting Obama, by the way.

Hologram wrote:Totally against it, though, honestly, I don't really mind that it got passed. Sure I prefer capitalism, as is portrayed by my nay vote, but socialism is a completely viable economic strategy. And who knows, we might pull a China in another 70 or 80 years and revert back to capitalism. Whatever.

Still, I think that if it even solves the problem now, it'll make the problem come back in 50 years and possibly worse.

As I like to say, everyone loves a free market until it comes and bites them in the ass.

Communtis bastard!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GrimReaper. wrote:

Hologram wrote:Totally against it, though, honestly, I don't really mind that it got passed. Sure I prefer capitalism, as is portrayed by my nay vote, but socialism is a completely viable economic strategy. And who knows, we might pull a China in another 70 or 80 years and revert back to capitalism. Whatever.

Still, I think that if it even solves the problem now, it'll make the problem come back in 50 years and possibly worse.

As I like to say, everyone loves a free market until it comes and bites them in the ass.

Communtis bastard!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Capitalist pig!!!!

From the other side of the world...I was/am very much in favour of it. The problem with these meltdowns is that its often a domino effect. The bailout plan might actually inspire a little stability as well as bringing some liquidity into the market. These governmental bailouts have had some success in similar situations in the past (Daewoo, Hyundai in S. Korea during the Asian Crisis).

A $700 billion subsidization of fraudulent financial practices, but it may be a necessary one to save us from economic meltdown. However-maybe the meltdown is something that just needs grinning and bearing, if we're going to let the system self-adjust rather than perpetuate a clearly broken system in the name of short-term security.

Napoleon Ier wrote:A $700 billion subsidization of fraudulent financial practices, but it may be a necessary one to save us from economic meltdown. However-maybe the meltdown is something that just needs grinning and bearing, if we're going to let the system self-adjust rather than perpetuate a clearly broken system in the name of short-term security.

I think we all feel slightly sickened that public money is bailing out the fat cats but there really was little choice , remember that those who drove the problem would be nicely cosseted from a severe depression as a result of the millions they salted away. The lesson to be learnt is that in future, economic policy should never be driven solely by political dogma.
Decisions should be made on the basis of sound financial sense not because they fit with the concept of Big/Small government or shock horror may be tainted with a degree of Socialist
thought. This really was the unacceptable face of capitalism and I trust that, at the very least ,there will be some attempt to claw back the vast sums taken by executives at the expense of shareholders and taxpayers in general.