Senate Sets Bank-Rescue Vote, House May Act Friday

And oh, look at this.
Market futures are dropping like a rock for tomorrow on news of the passage.

What's that all about then?

DJIA futes are down 30 and dropping; they were up 21 half an hour ago.

Nikkei (Japan's main market) dropped sharply on the news too.


This is very weird.

EDIT: DJIA futes now down 108. Like a rock indeed. What the hell is going on here??

[edit on 10/1/2008 by anachryon]

Just read this article:

House foes soften

So, do we know if this bailout parts of this bill remained the same as before? If nothing has changed except adding on a bunch of sweet deals, then we know our Senators are easily bribed, and our congressmen are about to be. "It's an awful, unfair bill. Oh wait, you're going to add in some bit of legislation I've got special interest in? Well then...hey, it's a necessary bill for the country..."

reply to post by skeptic1


So,I guess the $1-1.2 T talked about early on, is not too far out of range.
Sad to say the Mental Health Bill was paltry.

I want to know how I can get such a job...

Originally posted by tmbandt
reply to post by skeptic1

 

It's amazing isn't it. Our country is bankrupt and these fools are adding pork to a bill we can't afford already, to entice others to support it!! It's hard to wrap my brain around the complete and utter incompetence by our elected officials.
Twilight zone.

I know this is crazy, essentially they are saying we are to stupid to know what we are for or against,this will only prop up the market for a few days or weeks,then when it will come crashing down. I hope I am wrong but I have no faith in this government to do what has to be done.

reply to post by anachryon


Rumor has it this bill is due to fail in a fireball of a disaster before Congress on Friday.......

The Republicans doused the bill in tax breaks and so on.. moving a few Dems to the No vote with the Dem and Reps already over there..

Meaning the Yes crowd has more then 13 people to woo in less then 2 days..

From the article I posted a couple of posts above:

And with constituent feedback changing dramatically since Monday's shocking House defeat and the corresponding market plunge, lawmakers' comfort level with the package increased markedly.

Rep. John Shadegg of Arizona, a leading conservative who voted no on Monday, told CNN Wednesday he's "strongly leaning" toward voting for the plan.

Asked if was ready to switch from no to yes, Rep. Steve LaTourette, R-Ohio, said: "Not yet, but it's getting there."

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., said Republicans "can argue now that there have been some steps taken that they recommended."

Doesn't sound like it's headed for a crash and burn.

Isn't this the definition of taxation without representation? Great now we can all give our money to the bankers so they can loan it back to us at interest. Sounds like a great plan for us taxpayers. I believe if I was facing bankruptcy and I went to the bank to get a loan, they would deny me and maybe even giggle and talk about me after I left. Facing bankruptcy, I wouldn't qualify for a loan because of the standards the banks have set. However, now they are facing bankruptcy and want a loan and suddenly these standards no longer apply. I say same standards, "Denied." I am truly steaming over this. They all know how We the People feel, and their response seems to be, "So."

Is anybody else feeling an urge to go 1776 up in this mug?

reply to post by Rockpuck


I think a lot of the Republicans in the House who voted "no" before will vote "yes" on Friday.

As for the Dems....even Barney Frank is saying that this version of the bill will lose a significant number of Democrat votes in the House.

Well, we now have confirmation that when McCain and Obama accuse each other of voting for pork, they're BOTH right.




I heard there's some kind of tax break in there for a toy company who manufactures wooden arrows for toys? What the?!

reply to post by skeptic1


Absolutely not.. here is why:

Most republicans who voted no for the measure did so because they are against Big Brother..

These are the Non-Neocon Republicans.. granted, few are left, the Conservative man does not agree with Big Government, where as Neocons love it.. Liberal government policies with Social Conservative policies..

The Conservatives that are left, over overwhelmingly voted no on morals, or voted no because their constituents said NO.

I just hope enough had the balls to stand up to these crooks.

reply to post by Rockpuck


The point I was making is that things were put into the Senate bill that appealed to the Republicans (tax breaks, FDIC increased limits). Hence, a lot of the Republicans who voted no before are more likely to vote yes to this version of the bill.

And, some of those things that were added are not well liked by Democrats, especially the tax breaks for big businesses. Hence, some of the Dems that voted yes before are more likely to vote no to this version of the bill.

[edit on 10/1/2008 by skeptic1]

reply to post by GirlNextDoor


I thought both Obama and McCain were ADAMANTLY against pork ears.
We the taxpayers are taken for fools by all levels of government aren't
we? I used to think it was a privilege to vote. But now I'm not so sure.

It's going to pass the house. The house is realizing that when the economy talks, bs walks. Money is not flowing through the economy and the house will vote yes on the bill. Actually, if the original bill came through again, they would vote yes on it.

I'm not shocked that my senators voted for it Hutchison and Coryn have been lapdogs for this Adminstration for years now.The entire senate sholud be brought up on treason.

Well, I guess Bloomberg is a "reliable source".

The scary thing is the bill has hundreds of pages which I have NOT read. I still do not think it's the money, it's the "legislation". Not the oversight crap, because they have always been able to bypass that; destroy evidence. It's other language/laws that are included, which may or may not be understood ever by the "regular" public.

I just hope not too many folks out there have gone to complete ruins. There should be absolutely no blame associated to the regular public which wanted the American dream. Blame the unpayable debts incurred to the great Republic we used to call These United States of America.

When each dollar printed =1.06. How do you pay back the original dollar?

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by skeptic1

 

Absolutely not.. here is why:

Most republicans who voted no for the measure did so because they are against Big Brother..

These are the Non-Neocon Republicans.. granted, few are left, the Conservative man does not agree with Big Government, where as Neocons love it.. Liberal government policies with Social Conservative policies..

The Conservatives that are left, over overwhelmingly voted no on morals, or voted no because their constituents said NO.

I just hope enough had the balls to stand up to these crooks.

If I am understanding correctly, What we may see here is, at least conceptually, the birth (or defining moment) of a third party. One that openly resists the hijacking of the true small-government Republicans. I love the idea. But do the non-Neocon Republicans have the strength of character to carry it through?

Surely there is an element within the party that has defied the traditional values and successfully convinced all the rest to go along in other matters, some as economically relevant as the current fiasco. Is the fiscal element going to be strong enough an issue for a rift to occur?

We can only hope.

Well the futures seem rather unimpressed by the Senate passing this bill. As a matter of fact there is a nice little dump right after it passed on both the S&P and DOW futures. Could be nothing and work itself out by morning though.

I will laugh, I mean truly laugh if this thing passes and the market tanks anyway. Especially if it happens before the election.

I haven't found anything in this bill that requires recipients of taxpayer funded bailouts to resume lending. It does little to nothing to remedy the lack of trust between institutions ( as is most readily gauged by things like LIBOR and the TED spread).

You know, I am kind of in awe here... sounds melodramatic, but I see a parallel between our little conversation here and when some of our notable forefathers engaged in their own analysis of the fiscal subjugation of their time.

Perhaps that's a bit arrogant. If it is so taken, forgive me.

reply to post by Maxmars


No, no third party..

Even Ron Paul (non neocon) left the Libertarian Party because he had better chances under Republican banner..

The other Republicans who are not Liberal Neocons, will not leave due to fear that
1. Liberals will control two parties, one being socially liberal (most power) the other being socially conservative (less power but more then 3rd party)
2. Nothing in the House would ever pass
3. They rely on the power of the party to keep their jobs.. even the good honest politicians.

The Neocon's are incredibly wealthy, where as the Conservatives are generally not so wealthy, in comparison to the likes of McCain and Bush etc.

4. Vast majority of American's are Government Socialist. Social issues divide us, which is stupid because social issues are never brought up in real bills anyways.

I just finished skimming the Bill. Full Text pdf

I'll tell you one thing, the last third of the bill has mostly nothing to do with a bailout.

I guess we wait as see what the House does.