Pres. Bush calls "crisis meeting" over $700B bailout (hijacked by Libertarians)

[The Executive]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,427642,00.html

Republicans are supposed to be adverse to using $700 billion dollars of taxpayer money to fix corporate screwups, so I'm assuming that this recession is a pretty imminent threat.

http://kotaku.com/5054621/what-should-be-the-official-console-of-the-next-great-depression

This is kind of sarcastic, kind of not, but the fact remains that should we enter another depression disposable income will fall and prices of everything (including entertainment) will rise. Even if the numerical price points don't change, inflation will.

So, thoughts on the recession/how it impacts you as a gamer? Personally, I'm content with my 80GB PS3 and I've got a bunch of older systems with plenty of games; beyond LBP, Fallout and RE5 I won't be buying many more games anytime soon recession or not. My money needs to be going towards college expenses and car upkeep anyway.

Edit: This thread is now about Libertarianism, unless someone wants to change it back.

 

[GreenKirby]

I think the CEOs of these companies should pay for their OWN mistakes.

They shouldn't have let their greed get the best of them. After giving loans to people who know can't pay it back if they tried. And I'm sure the CEOs have the money.

 

[Sporkman]

 

[OmegaXXII]

Wall Street is serioulsly going to face some big economic issues if indeed our economy corrupts, much like it did during the Depression., and we can all blame the greedy people as well as our president for wanting to help those so called companies, that's right BUSH!

 

[espio87]

you know, this whole situation is really similar to what my country has gone through:
Nationalizing companies' debts: Domingo Cavallo, ex-Minister of Economy of Argentina did that in the 80's. He's also famous for making 1 Argentinian Peso equal to 1 U$D without any economic backup whatsoever. The latter resulted in one of the worst economic crisis my country has ever faced (Known as the 2001 Crisis)

And Bush said something related to people being able to withdraw their money from bank accounts or something like that. I can't remember exactly and I would appreciate if someone reminded me because of what happened here: In 2002 Ex-president Eduardo Duhalde said "The ones who deposited dollars will withdraw dollars". Sadly, people were not able to withdraw their money because most bank accounts were still frozen from the 2001 crisis. I remember that what both presidents said is really, really similar.

 

[KaoS]

Every time Bush says "Economy" or "Bailout" you have to drink.

Every time Bush says "terrorism" finish your drink.

 

[Jack Kieser]

I like that game. --^

 

[GreenKirby]

You know what the ironic thing is...

Bush would help rich CEOs bail them out with their problems.

But tell him about universal health care to help poorer people, he calls that socialism.

WTF

 

[cheap_josh]

Being a gamer? I don't know... because if the wrong decision is made we might be living in the streets, forget gaming.

 

[slave1]

aren't both sides of the political world supporting this bill? i thought i read that earlier today.

and about gaming. if the economy crashes screw games dude. find out a way to survive. as cheep josh said you might be out of your house.

 

[OmegaXXII]

Being a gamer? I don't know... because if the wrong decision is made we might be living in the streets, forget gaming.

hmm... this seems about right, the gaming world as much as I hate to think about it, won't be of any significance if our economy does go into a recession. (which I hope not, for our sake.)

 

[The Executive]

aren't both sides of the political world supporting this bill? i thought i read that earlier today.

From what I heard no progress was made at that meeting.

hmm... this seems about right, the gaming world as much as I hate to think about it, won't be of any significance if our economy does go into a recession. (which I hope not, for our sake.)

No kidding. It's hard enough to find a job in this town at present. McD's ain't looking too bad right now, but were there a depression they'd start the layoffs. I'll just have to hope.

 

[Deathcarter]

hmm... this seems about right, the gaming world as much as I hate to think about it, won't be of any significance if our economy does go into a recession. (which I hope not, for our sake.)

We are practically guaranteed to go into a recession. Recessions are a simple part of economics. We should have taken our medecine when the housing bubble first burst. But Congress just had to bail out the people with foreclosed homes as well as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The goverment really did not prepare for the imminent recession due to continued spending. And the media for the most part barely gave any indication about a damaged economy (outside of housing and only when it became a big problem) to the public up until just last week. People really did not have time to prepare for this recession.

I do not know the entire jist of the situation, but because we piled more debt onto the dollar, not only are we going to go into a recession, but the dollar doesn't have anything to back it up and prices are going to increase by alot. Of course, just my opinion.

 

[Pluvia's other account]

Whose fault is this btw?

 

[slave1]

Whose fault is this btw?

from what i hear it is a combination of insurance and banking companies that were doing more than they could handle. i am not one hundred percent sure though

 

[Peeze]

Whose fault is this btw?

Duh, Osama bin Laden. Obviously!

 

[cheap_josh]

Whose fault is this btw?

I don't know at all... if I was to guess it'd be Angelo Mozilo, ceo of countrywide.

 

[Mini Mic]

Ok for those who don't understand the subprime mortgage crisis I'll try and put it as simply as I can from what I understand.

Borrower: Hi Mr Bank can I borrow some money to buy a house?

Mr Bank: Well that depends, are you going to be able to pay it back to us?

Borrower: Why of course not!

Mr Bank: Ok then take all this money.

*Several Years Later*

Mr Bank: Hey why aren't you paying us back?

Borrower: I can't

Mr Bank: This is shocking to me for some reason. Also I can't just repossess your house because housing prices have fallen and therefore I will still lose money. Oh well time to raise interest rates so we can try and make some money off those who can afford their repayments

Mr Bank: Oh no now even less people can pay us back, save us Mr Insurance company!

Mr Insurance: Oh **** I'm insuring a bunch of bank that are going to go under

*bank and insurance companies die*

*US economy dies dragging the rest of the world with it*

Bush: Yeehaw! Lets ignore the concept of market mechanism and artificially keep firms alive.

*burns big pile of money*

Feel free to throw in oil prices in there somewhere.

 

[The Executive]

That makes perfect sense to me. And although I may be a conservative I don't like Pres. Bush's way with money. Not good.

 

[The Executive]

McFox, your Internet browser is lamer than mine.

 

[RDK]

McFox, your Internet browser is lamer than mine.

^ Win.

Spoiler

10SERVERF*CKS

 

[Spire]

Whose fault is this btw?

Ultimately, it's the Bush Administration. They have screwed us over more than this country has even been. It could potentially get worse than the Great Depression merely because a bunch of rich, greedy *******es from Wallstreet are trying to take as much money as possible.

Duh, Osama bin Laden. Obviously!

Hahahaha.

That makes perfect sense to me. And although I may be a conservative I don't like Pres. Bush's way with money. Not good.

McCain and Palin aren't going to clean **** up. McCain has been quoted (recently) with saying, "America's economy is great," and bull**** like that. He's either: a) completely lying to look better, or b) too rich to tell a difference. Sarah "In Headlights" Palin is a dumbstruck robot who knows absolutely nothing at all. Everything she says in interviews and speeches is rehearsed over and over and fed into her brain through a giant straw by McCain and folks. She is the absolute worst candidate for VP ever. Just think, if the Republicans win and McCain croaks in office, she'll be the president.

**** that. I'd call for immediate impeachment for the crime of "will ruin America completely within a month." I'm glad the truth behind her is finally shedding colors; people are realizing how ****ing stupid this woman is. I hate Palin so much.

 

[cheap_josh]

Ultimately, it's the Bush Administration.

I'm not an expert or anything, but I don't agree. I think it's mostly the real estate business. I don't think corporate leaders should be making a salary that big. I also don't think there are enough rules in the housing business (but that doesn't mean it's Bush's fault), especially with all these interest-only loans and everything...

'Cause then your house value drops so it's like you haven't paid anything and then your credit sucks and the bank wants their house back. People are losing their houses everywhere, it's linked to this whole thing.



We were talking about this today in class and the only two options (so far) was the government bailing the companies out and wiping the companies' slates, or... (I forgot the other one). But basically, pick the wrong choice and we're done.

 

[Spire]

I'm not an expert or anything, but I don't agree. I think it's mostly the real estate business. I don't think corporate leaders should be making a salary that big. I also don't think there are enough rules in the housing business (but that doesn't mean it's Bush's fault), especially with all these interest-only loans and everything...

'Cause then your house value drops so it's like you haven't paid anything and then your credit sucks and the bank wants their house back. People are losing their houses everywhere, it's linked to this whole thing.

Look at it this way. If Clinton remained president all these years, none of this would have happened, and if so, it would be very minor. The Bush Admin. paved the path so that the **** would hit the fan - and it did. Because we've lost so much money already, the balance between these corporate giants, housing, loans, and all that mess has been offset incredibly. Like I said, if Clinton remained President, we wouldn't be in this dilemma. It ultimately is the Bush Admin's fault.

 

[The Executive]

^ Win.

Spoiler

10SERVERF*CKS

I've been on this site 3 1/2 years and never exercised my obligatory double post. It had to be done.

 

[RedPeppers]

If clinton was still president we'd have a few more affairs by now! I'm with you on this though Josh.

Edit: Haha I was sooo planning on using that McFox thing!!

 

[Deathcarter]

Ultimately, it's the Bush Administration. They have screwed us over more than this country has even been. It could potentially get worse than the Great Depression merely because a bunch of rich, greedy *******es from Wallstreet are trying to take as much money as possible.

Bush is one of the worst Presidents in history, but I would blaim Congress for the economic state of our country. They are the ones responsible imo for not preparing for the imminent disaster and for being in bed with Wall Street who put us in this predicament.

McCain and Palin aren't going to clean **** up. McCain has been quoted (recently) with saying, "America's economy is great," and bull**** like that. He's either: a) completely lying to look better, or b) too rich to tell a difference. Sarah "In Headlights" Palin is a dumbstruck robot who knows absolutely nothing at all. Everything she says in interviews and speeches is rehearsed over and over and fed into her brain through a giant straw by McCain and folks. She is the absolute worst candidate for VP ever. Just think, if the Republicans win and McCain croaks in office, she'll be the president.

**** that. I'd call for immediate impeachment for the crime of "will ruin America completely within a month." I'm glad the truth behind her is finally shedding colors; people are realizing how ****ing stupid this woman is. I hate Palin so much.

To be fair, neither Obama and McCain look like they can handle the situation. Neither have even told the public of their plan for economic reform. So for now I will assume both are incappable of becoming a good President.

I do agree with you that Palin would be a horrible President if McCain died in office (Lord knows that she has the foreign relations skills of a goat).

 

[Deleted member]

You know what the ironic thing is...

Bush would help rich CEOs bail them out with their problems.

But tell him about universal health care to help poorer people, he calls that socialism.

WTF

Both are steps toward socialism. Nothing is wrong with socialism, it's just different. Part of different means contrary to the way our country is supposed to run on capitalism.

Whether the US buys out the companies or not, I hope the CEO's don't keep their current salaries at our taxes expense.

 

[Charizard92]

OK, there are two ways to have an economy with our system:
1: free market: This is the conservative approach, which is completely hands off. This is grounded in the belief that it is better for America if the big giants were free to do whatever the **** they want. Bush not only let this strategy loose, he actually made the giants stronger with loopholes and all. Yeah, here's the thing you learn from any monster movie, YOU TRY TO WEAKEN THE MONSTER, NOT MAKE IT STRONGER!
2: controlled market: On the opposite side of the coin is the liberal control the market approach. Essentially, Liberals believe that if you even out the playing field, then the economy can flourish. The numbers do support this one (well, free market and globalization may help, but not the way Bush is doing it).

The numbers:
Average Republican deficit: $131 billion
Average Democratic deficit: $30 billion
$44000: the Republican tax cut on the richest 1 percent (the remaining 99 got only a few hundred dollars)
The current gap between CEOs and average workers: 430 times (ten times more than a generation ago)
% of US population owning 80% of stock: only 10%
Amount spent on the bridge to nowhere: $223 million 9oh, and Sarah Palin accepted this money instead of rejecting it too)

Oh, and some more #s on Bush while we're at it:
750 & counting: number of new laws Bush has challenged with signing statements declaring his intent to reinterpret or disregard laws he just signed.
568: The number of signing statements the former 42 (or 41, if you don't count Grover Cleveland twice) presidents issued, COMBINED!
$236 billion: the surplus bush inherited in 2001
$248 billion: the deficit in 2006
36%: Bush's approval rating in 6 years of office and around 25% now
66%: Clinton's approval rating during his impeachment, DURING HIS IMPEACHMENT!
$2 million: tax dollars the republican congress appropriated to buy Bush a yacht

Yep, oh, and if you hear a Republican say we need to save America from this "do nothing" congress, here's a little fact for you: In order to pass a bill, 2/3rds of congress have to approve of it, which is hard enough, since the Democrats control only over half of it. And once a bill gets passed, the president can veto it (which he almost certainly does) and in order to override a veto, 3/4ths of congress have to vote for it. That explains why we don't have universal health care for kids right now.

Oh, and one more thing, Bush plans to send a bill to essentially bypass an investigation of the Fish and Wildlife foundation on building projects to see if they impact endangered species, because who is better at determining whether or not a project is endangering a species other than the people building it? (the last statement was clear sarcasm). How about environmentalist, green peace, the Fish and wildlife foundation, scientists, Al Gore, and several of us for starters.

IF THERE IS ONE PERSON HERE WHO DOES NOT WANT ANY SMASH CHARACTER TO MAIM THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION, PLEASE BANG YOUR HEAD AGAINST THE WALL UNTIL YOU GO UNCONSCIOUS!

 

[Engel]

Ultimately, it's the Bush Administration. They have screwed us over more than this country has even been. It could potentially get worse than the Great Depression merely because a bunch of rich, greedy *******es from Wallstreet are trying to take as much money as possible.

Hahahaha.

McCain and Palin aren't going to clean **** up. McCain has been quoted (recently) with saying, "America's economy is great," and bull**** like that. He's either: a) completely lying to look better, or b) too rich to tell a difference. Sarah "In Headlights" Palin is a dumbstruck robot who knows absolutely nothing at all. Everything she says in interviews and speeches is rehearsed over and over and fed into her brain through a giant straw by McCain and folks. She is the absolute worst candidate for VP ever. Just think, if the Republicans win and McCain croaks in office, she'll be the president.

**** that. I'd call for immediate impeachment for the crime of "will ruin America completely within a month." I'm glad the truth behind her is finally shedding colors; people are realizing how ****ing stupid this woman is. I hate Palin so much.

Yeah, let's blame the Bush Administration for everything. I mean that is the easy way out right? Sighs, no the Bush Administration isn't perfect but to just blame them is silly. Heck, Congress has a lower approval rating than Bush >_> and at this point I'd say Democrats and Republicans should be sharing the blame equally.


As for the economy as a whole, it isn't that bad. The stock market has been doing great the past few years and even with the hit it took recently, it's still doing well overall.

As for Palin, you may hate her but clearly you know little to nothing about her. She may be a bit odd on her religious views but she's arguably just as if not more qualified than Obama to be President, except she's not the one running for it. The woman has fought against corruption in her own party and beat out the previous governor of Alaska. Also lol at her interview with Couric where Couric says something like "You said McCain will reform Wall Street, other than these examples of what he's done, can you tell us what he's done?" I love what our local radio host (Honsberger) said about it today, "She's basically asking Palin, other than 2 + 2 equaling 4, what does 2 + 2 equal?" >_> I'm still waiting to see an interviewer give Palin a decent interview >_>

(Lord knows that she has the foreign relations skills of a goat).

She has been a governor of one of the 50 U.S. States. Past Presidents like Clinton, have also been governors with the same foreign experience (or lack there of) as her before being elected. To fault her for this is absurd. Obama as well doesn't have the best foreign experience and I'm getting sick of people comparing her to him, SHE'S NOT RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.

 

[thesage]

I'll add on to something somebody said earlier.

Ok for those who don't understand the subprime mortgage crisis I'll try and put it as simply as I can from what I understand.

Borrower: Hi Mr Bank can I borrow some money to buy a house?

Mr Bank: Well that depends, are you going to be able to pay it back to us?

Borrower: Why of course not!

Mr. Bank: Well lemme check your credit report. Oh wow. You have a really bad score. SrryNoMONIESfur u

Borrower: But now I can't afford a house in that nice safe neighborhood where I can raise my children.

AND

Borrower: Well you can't do that. That's discriminating against me due to my financial status. I'm suing.

AND

Mr. Bank: We have no customers because the rules aren't letting us lend to everybody, plus we're getting sued. Let's ask the government to let us do that.

Government: kay

Mr Bank: Ok then take all this money.

Borrower: Now I can get that house, and that car, and those pieces of jewelry, etc.

*Several Years Later*

Mr Bank: Hey why aren't you paying us back?

Borrower: I can't

Mr Bank: This is shocking to me for some reason. Also I can't just repossess your house because housing prices have fallen and therefore I will still lose money. Oh well time to raise interest rates so we can try and make some money off those who can afford their repayments


Mr Bank: Oh no now even less people can pay us back, save us Mr Insurance company!

Mr Insurance: Oh **** I'm insuring a bunch of bank that are going to go under

*bank and insurance companies die*

*US economy dies dragging the rest of the world with it*

Bush: Yeehaw! Lets ignore the concept of market mechanism and artificially keep firms alive. While we're doing it, we'll choose which firms we'll keep alive cuz that one guy who worked at that one firm got me mad 2 years and 7 days ago.

*burns big pile of money*

Oil prices shoot up and then go down when nobody will be able to afford it or car insurance.

Congress: we can't agree on what to do since there are no good options on what we should do.

What I feel most afraid of what will happen:

Mr. Bank: Let's demand everybody repays their mortgages in full so we can get as much money as possible and bail out.

That's what caused the Great Depression... And my mortgage isn't payed off yet...

I think it's Congress' fault, Bush's fault, and the American peoples fault IMO. I saw this coming like 5 years ago when I was 13. I'm just glad that my mom has a government job because if things go worse a lot of people are going to lose their jobs and/or retirement and savings.

If things get really bad, max out all your credit cards buying canned food. I doubt the credit card companies will care when they're out of business.

 

[Hyper_Ridley]

^LOL.

Good thing the only winter game I really care about this year is Sonic Unleashed.

 

[slave1]

sage has a point you just cant blame everything on the bush administration. it is a combination of everyone. stupid stupid stupid buyers, banks doing things that could back fire and screw everyone. and huge insurance companies trying to back up more than they can handle. dont blame the government when it is not all their falt.

 

[Dodongo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dv6rQ0U01Yc

Why the bailout is a very bad idea.

 

[Eor]

This thread is now about Libertarianism

 

[RDK]

sage has a point you just cant blame everything on the bush administration. it is a combination of everyone. stupid stupid stupid buyers, banks doing things that could back fire and screw everyone. and huge insurance companies trying to back up more than they can handle. dont blame the government when it is not all their falt.

To say that the government didn't play a large part in ruining the economy is incredible stupidity. Nobody decided to bail out companies who made horrendous decisions with their money besides the government.

And by bailing out these companies, it encourages more people to make shaky decisions in the hopes that they get a "Get Out of Jail Free Card" from the government like these insurance companies did.

Why should people who don't make good financial decisions be allowed to continue to run their businesses? If we were just laissez faire, the business would just cease to exist because of poor decisions, which is what, by all rights, should be happening.

This thread is now about Libertarianism

Libertarianism FTW.

---

Enjoy Capitalism

 

[1048576]

I believe the goal of a society is to maximize the utility of its constituents. Under a pure laissez-faire system, the GDP would be highest, but the distribution of this wealth would be remarkably uneven. Under a socialist regime, the GDP would decrease, but the distribution of wealth would be more equitable.

The law of diminishing marginal returns dictates that the more of something you have, the less utility you would gain from having an additional given amount. For example, if you don't have any soda, and I offer you a can of coke, you would probably take it. The cost to you is minimal (admitting you want something from me, very remote chance that I contaminated it,) but the benefit is moderately large. Your thirst is quenched and your taste buds are sensated. You have gained a moderate utility. Now imagine you have ten cans of coke, and I offer you a can of coke. You would probably not take my offer. The cost is the same, but you would get significantly less utility from the 11th can of coke because your thirst is already quenched and you already have a coke taste in your mouth. Money works in like fashion. If Bill Gates and I see $10 on the ground, which one of us is going to snag it first? I probably will, because $10 means more to me than it does to Bill Gates. In fact, 10 cents means more to me than $10 means to Bill Gates. I would be in favor of a proposal that reduces the GDP by $9.90 if that proposal would transfer the $10 from Bill Gates to 10 cents for a less fortunate individual.

You will probably counter with the idea that poor people are at fault for being poor, and they deserve the low utility they have. You desire social justice over utility, and as such, you are in favor of a laissez-faire system. I think we can both agree that many factors which influence a person's wealth (intelligence, upbringing, natural aptitude, opportunity, blind luck) are uncontrollable. I would further argue that because we are both rational beings, we both believe that effects have causes. The choices we make are not spontaneously generated by us, but are effects caused by natural stimuli. I believe free will is an illusion, and as a result, nobody is technically at fault for any actions or thoughts they harbor. Because all inequity is unearned in this regard, I would argue that we are morally obligated to equalize the distribution of wealth so that utility is maximized.

E.g. stop short of communism, because an extra penny for me is not worth taking a dollar from my upper-middle class neighbor.





I still think the bailouts are a bad idea, though. Rich gettting richer sort of thing.

 

[Doxa]

Libertarianism FTW.

God no, I hope this is sarcasm I am not catching onto. Libertarianism is a terrible political philosophy.

I want you to understand this... deregulation, meaning the removal of governmental control, of the banking system has caused this to happen.

 

[RDK]

I believe the goal of a society is to maximize the utility of its constituents. Under a pure laissez-faire system, the GDP would be highest, but the distribution of this wealth would be remarkably uneven. Under a socialist regime, the GDP would decrease, but the distribution of wealth would be more equitable.

This is the reason why Libertarianism is superior, although it's hard to apply it to the situation right now.

Simply put, the people who earn a living and actually contribute to society deserve to be rich. It's not our job to make sure the dregs and moochers of society have a comfortable living experience. Socialism is one big crutch for people who don't deserve welfare.

People need to stop p!ssing and moaning about how bad their living conditions are. Get off your ***** and do something about.

God no, I hope this is sarcasm I am not catching onto. Libertarianism is a terrible political philosophy.

I want you to understand this... deregulation, meaning the removal of governmental control, of the banking system has caused this to happen.

The hell you talking about? Libertarianism is the best political philosophy.

It's people like liberal socialists that are ruining the economy (or at least trying to *COUGH* OBAMA *COUGH*).

 

[Doxa]

The hell you talking about? Libertarianism is the best political philosophy.

It's people like liberal socialists that are ruining the economy (or at least trying to *COUGH* OBAMA *COUGH*).

You did not make a reasoned post as to why the further deregulation of the market will fix this while deregulation is what CAUSED this.

If you will not make an intelligent argument then your posts are useless. Its about the same as saying "NO WAY, YOU'RE GAY"

I am going to pose a question to you: would you rather place yourself in the control of business, or in the control of a government? Give reasons to why and why not in your answer.