The current power-grab
Sep. 23rd, 2008 12:14 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
progAs ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
radtea notes in comments in my earlier post, at least as egregious as the amount of money at stake in the bailout is the provision that the Secretary of the Treasury will be able to do whatever he wants with the money, without any legal or congressional oversight. I wasn't fully aware of this when I wrote the letters, or I would have made mention of that, too. (I stand by the letters as written, regardless.)
Paulson and Bernanke (with the president and their handful of hardcore congressional allies cheering them on) are essentially saying You must give us sweeping new powers NOW, before it's TOO LATE. Don't debate it, you fools! That is only wasting time! The entire country's financial system is collapsing around our ears and you wish to quibble over the fine print? You will DOOM US ALL! SIGN THE PAPER! SIGN IT!
Yeah, no. I'm guessing that they're hoping this will work because the president and the old Republican congress used to love pulling this sort thing off, not too long ago. Way to set a bad example, guys.
See alsotoddalcott's insight regarding foxes and henhouses.
Meanwhile, I don't care about the fuss about individual executives' golden parachutes. Yeah, so the megarich guy does a little tapdance and gets another million tossed at him before he fucks off in his private jet to his private island. Whatever. That's chaff, and has negligible effect on me-as-a-taxpayer-and-citizen. Giving over half a trillion bucks with no strings attached to a single individual in the government? Well now, yes, that's another matter.
Please, Americans, if you haven't contacted your congressfolk about this yet, do so today.
radtea notes in comments in my earlier post, at least as egregious as the amount of money at stake in the bailout is the provision that the Secretary of the Treasury will be able to do whatever he wants with the money, without any legal or congressional oversight. I wasn't fully aware of this when I wrote the letters, or I would have made mention of that, too. (I stand by the letters as written, regardless.)Paulson and Bernanke (with the president and their handful of hardcore congressional allies cheering them on) are essentially saying You must give us sweeping new powers NOW, before it's TOO LATE. Don't debate it, you fools! That is only wasting time! The entire country's financial system is collapsing around our ears and you wish to quibble over the fine print? You will DOOM US ALL! SIGN THE PAPER! SIGN IT!
Yeah, no. I'm guessing that they're hoping this will work because the president and the old Republican congress used to love pulling this sort thing off, not too long ago. Way to set a bad example, guys.
See also
toddalcott's insight regarding foxes and henhouses.Meanwhile, I don't care about the fuss about individual executives' golden parachutes. Yeah, so the megarich guy does a little tapdance and gets another million tossed at him before he fucks off in his private jet to his private island. Whatever. That's chaff, and has negligible effect on me-as-a-taxpayer-and-citizen. Giving over half a trillion bucks with no strings attached to a single individual in the government? Well now, yes, that's another matter.
Please, Americans, if you haven't contacted your congressfolk about this yet, do so today.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-09-23 06:40 pm (UTC)"Hey, look what we got from 9/11 - let's try the same thing with the moneys."
So, we got into this because oversight was lax. And we want to perpetuate the bailout with the oversight of one man? One man controlling over a trillion dollars?! Well, I'd suggest we'll be close to 3 trillion by the end. Has any government program ever cost as much as they estimate? I say 4x their estimate to start. After all, Iraq was only going to cost, at most, $60 billion.