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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (279873)	11/10/2008 6:23:28 PM
From: greenspirit	1 Recommendation Respond to of 793955

It certainly was a difficult decision. I was on the fence for quite some time. Then it occurred to me how many banks we have on every street corner across the country and how we would probably be ok with a few thousand less. I was also perplexed by receiving in the mail constant solicitations to borrow money (pre-approved for XX dollars), while everyone was claiming credit was impossible to get. Nothing added up. Which told me we were probably being fed a sky is falling load of B.S. And like you say, where does the bailout end? Why not just bail everyone out?

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (279873)	11/10/2008 8:36:04 PM
From: skinowski	1 Recommendation Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793955

I simply think letting the financials fail was a risk too far. Why? Let the solvent firms buy up - for pennies on the dollar - those who drove themselves into insolvency. Where needed, work out a deal to help those new - presumably diligent and competent - owners. Stock and bond holders of failed companies SHOULD lose their investments. That's how honest, free markets are intended to work. Having honest, free markets work their magic would do a better job at restoring confidence than watching the circus of how those with best political connections grab the largest chunks of taxpayer's money.