Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous | Next


Congress votes down bail-out package. Because even the Republicans won't listen to Bush now.

I know very little about this stuff, but I'm getting the impression we're, well, fucked.

Edit: Ooh, someone's just pointed out that my company is technically owned by a bank. That could be a problem.

On the other hand, Unexpected!Singing!AlanRickman in the programme I'm subtitling is a nice surprise.



( 16 comments — Comment )
Sep. 29th, 2008 06:46 pm (UTC)
I wish I was brainy enough to understand politics. Just so I could have something to justifiably bitch about.
Sep. 29th, 2008 07:36 pm (UTC)
I can do politics, a bit, but I'm completely ignorant on economics. And the combination is just ultra-confusing.

(And you so are brainy enough, it's just whether it's worth paying attention to ;))
Sep. 29th, 2008 06:47 pm (UTC)
Bush has been a lame duck President for at least a year now. That is one of the benefits of having many of the Congressional elections on years that aren't the same as the Presidential one.
Sep. 29th, 2008 07:37 pm (UTC)
Yep, but from what I've read it's the Republicans in Congress who voted no, rather than the Democrats...
Sep. 29th, 2008 08:17 pm (UTC)
That's because they know that they don't have to listen to him anymore. In a little over a month, he will be gone but (depending on when their own personal election is scheduled) a lot of those representatives will still be around long after. They know that whatever they do, they will have to answer to the voters about it and this one felt kind of safe since it was Bush and his appointees that were trying to force it through.
Sep. 29th, 2008 08:37 pm (UTC)
Ah, yes, that makes sense!
Oct. 2nd, 2008 02:10 pm (UTC)
There's an ideological element to it as well. A great deal of Republicans are tied to the idea that the free-market is a near-perfect system (even though the present crisis is the result of under-regulation of the banking loans system) and a massive government bailout of failing businesses is essentially an admission that their ideology is flawed. For that reason a lot of them won't vote for Bush's package even if it was in their own interests. People aren't very good at admitting they've thrown their lot in with a crock - look at Labour's slow admittance that a nationalisation wasn't the answer, it took them over a decade.

On the other side, you've got Democrats who know that this is a massive government bailout of businesses that have spent the last 20 years arguing for smaller government and deregulation - the very things that helped bring about the crisis - and are now going cap in hand to the taxpayer demanding corporate welfare. Again, for ideological reasons the reaction of a lot of them is "make your bed, lie in it".

So it's about rather more than just shrugging-off a lame duck President (although that is a big part of it, as is the fact that the bailout is unpopular with ordinary Americans as silentbob037 suggests). The bailout will go through, though, it's probably going to be essential to prevent a collapse in US stock market which it's in everyone's interests to prevent.
Oct. 2nd, 2008 04:05 pm (UTC)
The main thing that people are starting to get nervous about collapsing has to do with the credit markets here in the US. All aspects of this area have seriously tightened up their rules to the point that it's becoming nearly impossible to get any kind of loan unless you have an absolutely perfect credit rating. The idea is that, by buying this back debt off of the banking companies, it will free up there assets to start being a little more giving with the credit. When McDonalds restaurants are having trouble getting credit for the franchises to order more of the company specific products they sell (like hamburger patties and stuff like that), you know that things are going bad.
(Deleted comment)
Sep. 29th, 2008 07:38 pm (UTC)
Maybe it will make us re-evaluate our relationship with them?
Sep. 29th, 2008 11:28 pm (UTC)
I don't think the relationship is the problem as such.

I mean, sure, you could. But it wouldn't matter.
Oct. 2nd, 2008 02:14 pm (UTC)
The worst-case scenario is that the US goes into deep recession which will impact on the rest of the world. I don't think it'll be as bad as 1929 - Europe and East Asia have strong economies in their own right now - but it'll be bad and it'll accelerate the American decline.

Best-case scenario is that the US stockmarket recovers strongly from the slump and Europe and East Asia feel rather less shockwaves and the recessions are only short-term whilst confidence returns to the markets.

I think both scenarios are very unlikely. Chances are we'll have a global recession but not another Great Depression.
Sep. 29th, 2008 07:38 pm (UTC)
Sep. 29th, 2008 07:41 pm (UTC)
I know! Glad you had a good time in Italy, btw, and your photos are fab!
Sep. 29th, 2008 09:36 pm (UTC)
Why thank you! I still have to update properly, but as you can see I certainly did a lot of different things when I was there.
Sep. 29th, 2008 09:36 pm (UTC)
Wanna know something scary about the whole thing? Now the news channels are reporting that some of the banks may not have the cash on hand to release funds to companies trying to meet payroll. This is VERY VERY scary!

And scarier to us now because we now have a mortgage to pay and money is a whole lot tighter because of it.
Sep. 29th, 2008 09:59 pm (UTC)
This is just the market adjusting itself. Trust in the invisible hand, all will be good. Just consider the alternative; regulations on the financial sector restricting what they can do with your money! Ludicrous. Let the market have a free hand and ultimately it will all be OK. In a few years time we'll look back on this and laugh. After all, this bail out package was just back door socialism, and that would be the end of civilisation as we know it.

Lordy, it's fun being an American.
( 16 comments — Comment )


bad wolf
Notes from extinction

Latest Month

November 2010
Powered by LiveJournal.com