Politics, emotions, politics

[nancylebov]

I don't think these two conspiracies can be true at the same time.....

The bailout is a Republican plan to loot the treasury.

Republicans Released Ad Attacking Dems For Passing Bailout-- Before Vote Failed

Well, I guess they could both be true, but it seems like an excessively complicated plot, and if it was tried, it didn't work.

Other than that, here's a fine Don't panic, they're trying to con you parable, and a description of the emotions around this that matches mine remarkably well, except that he's saying "what's happened to my friends list?" and I'm saying "what's happened to my lj?"

I knew that food prices and energy prices and oil prices and rent prices are all going crazy, I know the most erudite and storied of our financial institutions are collapsing invisibly and silently just like the GLACIERS. But my brain is wired like an animal brain, not a god brain or a machine brain. I can't feel the difference. For all of this, I keep going to work, they keep paying me and that keeps being enough to keep me afloat. My expenses change and things get harder but there is not, from here, a cataclysm. When it hits, I don't know what I'd be able to do about it. I suppose this is why our reactions always have to be semi-mystical.

Not quite my situation, but my health is decent, I'm not worried about money, and the weather has been excellent-- some rain, but the temperatures are lovely and there's been enough sunlight. It seems like we're heading for trouble, but there's been so much emergency-mongering with nothing happening in my immediate vicinity that I just don't feel it.

That being said, I'm comprehensively pissed off about them using raising FDIC insurance to $250,000/account to sweeten the bailout so it will pass. I realize this is politics as usual, but if the increased insurance is a good, overdue idea, they should just do it instead of holding it over people's heads to pass something the public doesn't want.

Comments

[redaxe.livejournal.com]

Several things. First, on the conspiracy ideas, note that the one about looting is about poor governance and corruption, while the other is about political scheming. They're not incompatible, and should each be judged on their own merits. (I tend to believe the latter more than the former, though given how tightly connected Henry Paulson, in particular, is to his Wall Street compatriots -- except for Dick Fuld, who was the CEO of Lehman Brothers, apparently -- I could be persuaded.)

Second, I agree that the bill as defeated initially was a terrible one. The tranched aspect, intended to release money gradually, apparently could be easily worked around so that the entire amount was available within weeks for disbursement; likewise, the checks on executive compensation weren't grandfathered for current execs, so that they can bail anytime and get their humongous parachutes.

Third, raising the FDIC limit's not a bad idea. (How is it going to be paid for, though?) In fact, there is a better bill that's been proposed which includes it. Congressman Peter DeFazio has a copy of his proposal at his website (but apparently house.gov is down -- probably overtaxed. A copy of it is here (http://www.economicpopulist.org/?q=content/house-progressives-introduce-their-own-bail-out-bill) (sorry about linking to a site with embedded video; the bill itself is in type on the page). I will be calling my Congresspeople momentarily to urge them to support this bill.

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

If it's really important to the R's to pass the bill, why risk sabotaging it?

[redaxe.livejournal.com]

It's a win-win for them. If we stipulate both theories are true, then they either scarf $700bn out of the pot for themselves (and simultaneously hamstring a probable Democratic administration), OR they gain momentum in the election (particularly in contested Congressional districts) by being on the populist (defeat) side of the vote while the Dems look bad for passing it. Or better yet, both: if it passes on mainly Dem votes, but enough Repubs vote against to play well in the media, they hit the jackpot.

Again, I'm not certain that either (much less both) of these were actual strategy, but I can certainly see where folks suggesting them are coming from.

[lpetrazickis.livejournal.com]

If you allow for the existence of factions among Rs, this is less of a mystery. Some Rs wanted this, other Rs did that. Left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. Etc.

Also, Krugman | Bailout narratives (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/01/bailout-narratives/).

[alexx-kay.livejournal.com]

If you think that attempting to do X in secret, while simultaneously damning your opponents for doing X, is either excessively complicated or unusual in politics, then you haven't been paying enough attention.

[captain-button.livejournal.com]

Maybe I'm missing something, but how many people have more than $100,000 in a bank account? If you have that much sitting around aren't there better places to put it?

Do things like 401ks and IRA count as part of that, or are they something else?

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

My impression is that small businesses are reasonably likely to have that much money-- it gets recycled so quickly that it doesn't make sense to invest it.

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

My sister the CPA told me that if a business gets a loan, the deal is likely to require that the loan be kept in the bank that issued it until it's spent.

[inertiacrept.livejournal.com]

That inertiacrept guy is an asshole.

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

Really? I honestly can't tell if you're joking or if you don't like what you wrote.

[inertiacrept.livejournal.com]

I like to be my own primary detractor.

[captain-button.livejournal.com]

That will make you go blind, you know.

[inertiacrept.livejournal.com]

THAT'S A CONSERVATIVE MYTH!

(scurries off to shave his palms)