Thursday, February 5, 2009


BBC NEWS US watchdog attacks bail-out plan The Congressional Oversight Panel says the government overpaid for distressed financial assets and shares last year. . . . The US House of Representatives passed the $700bn government plan to rescue the US financial sector in October last year, having rejected an earlier version of it. The package was aimed at buying up the bad debts of failing financial institutions on Wall Street. But it was rapidly switched to supplying additional capital to the banks, on terms that were not fully disclosed at the time. Many members of Congress have been unhappy with how the distribution of Tarp funds has been handled. The head of the oversight panel, Elizabeth Warren, told a congressional committee that after three months on the job, her panel is still not getting enough answers from the Treasury. She described the bail-out as "an opaque process at best".
--read entire article--
______________________________________________________ There are those of us--fools we may be--who wonder if "aimed at buying up the bad debts of failing financial institutions on Wall Street" is a target worthy of taxpayer funds. Let the bastards fail.
Are we to make well all the victims of Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme as well? Is there, indeed, any difference between the Madoff Scheme and the Goldman Sachs Scheme, the AIG Scheme or any of the other variations on a theme from Charles Ponzi (1882-1949)? Why is it a bad idea for the United States government to initiate a National Bank, run by, funded by and governed by (dare I say it?) the government. What possible legitimate purpose is there in throwing trillions of dollars into the corrupt hands of private banks, when the same thing could be accomplished by corrupt government--thus eliminating the middle-man?