new.morning wrote: > Poulson sems like a great guy -- personally. And he is smart and > expereinced. However, Paulson can speak in terms that intimidate many. > I don't have a problem with that but he shouldn't speak it in secret. I mean the American public may be dumbed down but lets try to pull them up to a higher level of understanding and to not use that thing upstairs as a pillow weight. > But think a moment. Several weeks ago . Poulson was given $100's of > billion in authorization -- to use as a big stick -- to halt the > crisis in confidence and restore market order. That was his pitch. And > he openly admits he was surprised to the bone that this authorization > only accelerated the crises and forced him to quickly spend "the big > stick". Mr. Paulson does not have the best judgment based on his > recent track record. > > Don't be intimidated by manipulative talk of "financial meltdown". Use > your abundant common sense to see what is and what is not. Demand that > he lay out the case for total financial meltdown. > IOW, don't look at the meldown until it is too late. The MSM "economic" pundits seem to be in the business these days of weaving maya (spin) to keep the public from "panicking" when maybe the public should be taking action. > Clearly, before the short sale ban on Friday, Goldmans Sachs (Poulson > is former chair) was headed towards a meltdown. > Please ask Mr. Paulson for a clear definition of financial melt down. > Does he mean a meltdown of the careers and some of the multimillion > dollar wealth of his Wall Street colleagues and his former Goldman > Sachs associates? Without the totally abrupt, no warning shut down of > short trades on Friday morning -- Mr Poulson temporarily prevented a > meltdown of his former company GS -- and his peers careers. > I'm sure the careers of the "brotherhood" will not be in jeopardy but those of the "masses" may have been squandered already. > By meltdown does he mean that the economy is simply going to stop and > all savings, homes and jobs will be destroyed? I believe he is using > a very scary term to manipulate to manipulate people into thinking the > latter when it is much more the former. > > if the asset bubble is left to unwind -- as only the market can do -- > congress cannot unwind it -- all assets will remain. Houses, > factories, cars, server farms, PCs, intellectual capital. None of it > will be destroyed. What will be melted away is the fluff, distortion > and sludge from many bad decisions that is strangling the economy. Ah but who will own it? Some Chinese family that shows up at your door and tells you to get out because they now own all your stuff?
This problem has been going on for some time. It's been like watching a train wreck in slow motion. Economist Dr. Ravi Batra said the other day that this fix will probably only work for 2-3 weeks and then we'll be back in trouble again. These are bailing wire approaches. And who's going to pay? The $700 billion bailout cost is about $5K per taxpayer. You all have that extra to spare? Don't believe the propaganda. I would rather see the whole thing come crashing down so we can erase the blackboard and start all over again.
