Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (146164)	11/7/2008 1:52:38 AM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

No, you asked me for specifics: "Well its pretty extensive, so its hard to even consider all of it at once except in the most general terms. Some government actions in response to the problems might not be considered bailouts. If you list some of the specific points you want to examine, I could tell you whether I oppose them or not." I gave them to you twice but you failed to answer the specifics which you asked for. Now you are finally saying this after several (I think four) attempts to get you to be "I'm against the $700bil (or more) bailout plan, that applies to all the companies that received money from it." Part of the bailout is increasing FDIC insurance because that is supposed to be a temporary way to prevent run on banks. So, you think the federal government should have let Fannie and Freddie, Bear Stearns, AIG, MMFs (breaking the buck), et al fail? What do you think our economy and financial system would look like today if that had happened? You are also ok with letting all 3 car companies fail as they appear to be headed in that direction without more government help. So you think government should be totally hands off, not do any bailouts, not increase FDIC insurance or (indeed) get rid of it entirely, not backstop MMFs, etc. under any and all conditions.