Okay, Fine, I’ll Write About the Damn Financial Bailout
Author: Nick
Category: Money
Topics: economy, politics
Today I found the following e-mail in my inbox:
Dear Nick,
How come you haven’t written anything about the horrible injustice that is the $700 BILLION DOLLAR bailout of stupid people? I’d love to see one of your cartoons about this topic too, but I’d also be interested in hearing what you seriously think about the bailout.
~Scott
Scott, you bring up a good point—I tend not to write about politics and so-called “important issues” very much. That’s because topics like the financial bailout (whose proper name is the Kick Taxpayers In The Balls Act of 2008) get covered on every other news site, blog, and cocktail napkin in the country, so I figured everyone wouldn’t mind reading about something more refreshing for a change, like ketchup theft and workplace drinking games.
But fine, I give up. I’ll give you all my two cents on the financial bailout. In short, it sucks. In long, it suuuuuuuuuuuuuucks. In fact, it sucks so much that, for the first time in history, I actually wrote to my Congressional representatives and told them not to vote for it if they still want my vote in November.
What exactly about the financial bailout plan has earned my boundless ire? Well, by default, I tend to oppose any federal legislation that would spend $700 billion on anything. You can spend a mere $85 billion to bail out an insurance giant and I might not bat an eye. And you might be able to get away with spending $500 billion on a war nobody likes anymore. But $700 billion dollars is where I draw the freaking line.
See? There’s the line, and I just drew it.
So why do I have such a problem with the government spending $700 billion dollars on what essentially amounts to a blank check to the financial industry to continue being a bunch of retarded monkeys? Well, for one, consider exactly what else could be done with that much money. $700 billion dollars can buy a lot of things, such as:
- A check made out to me in the amount of $700 billion dollars.
- $700 billion in cash in a suitcase for me.
- 15 minutes alone with Hayden Panettiere to do anything I want.
- Portugal.
The other problem I have with this bailout—and likely the only thing I’m going to say in this entire VERY SERIOUS ARTICLE that makes any sense—is that it doesn’t help the people who need help the most. No no, I’m not talking about homeowners struggling to keep their houses. I’m talking about midget helicopter policemen. Nowhere in the entire text of the bailout bill is any reference whatsoever made to midget helicopter policemen. In fact, at second glance, a whole lot of other people aren’t being helped by this bill, including:
- You.
- Me.
- Us.
- Everyone we know.
Indeed, unless you know someone who works in the financial industry or who somehow benefits from the merciless death of the U.S. dollar (e.g. terrorists—and I hope you don’t know any of those), chances are that you can’t think of a single person who’d benefit from a bailout bill whose text does not include the line “The Federal government will write a check to each American in the amount of $5,000″ and instead says (and this is a direct quote from a paraphrase of someone I heard talking about the bill) “Neener, neener. Thanks for the bailout, chumps. Love, Wall Street.”
Now if you’ll excuse me, it’s time for me to get off my soapbox which is really just a regular cardboard box because I’m too poor to afford a soapbox thanks to the economy. And hopefully this will teach you all never to request that I talk seriously on any serious subject ever again. Seriously.
Loading ...
24 Responses »
1.
David H
September 30th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
Classic article…it about sums up how I feel. However, I neglected to consider the midget helicopter policemen. Thanks for looking out for the little guys.
2.
mbhunter
September 30th, 2008 at 11:29 pm
“$700 billion dollars can buy a lot of things”
That’s true. You could also put some of your seven hundred billion dollars dollars in your IRA account. Or, you can put a bit of it in a bank account and take it out at the ATM machine — but only if you remember your PIN number.
3.
shraz
September 30th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
how about 700Billion used to upgrade the entire infrastructures including: bridge, roads, trains, power lines, etc…
4.
Jennifer Aaronsen
October 1st, 2008 at 2:25 am
I still don’t understand why we taxpayers have to pay for what others have wasted? If we would have taken the hit back in 2001 and instead of lowering intrest, we would have been in much better shape today.
5.
Goca
October 1st, 2008 at 9:35 am
Tax have a many good and bad ways,but for ordinary people is only BAD
6.
JT Money
October 1st, 2008 at 10:26 am
That’s a pretty thin line for such a big bill…
7.
Jack
October 1st, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Not true that you don’t write about serious issues. I heard about Sarah Palin for the first time on this here website thingy. You mentioned that she was a hot governor. That was months before she was national news. You practically told me everything I needed to know about her:
8.
john
October 2nd, 2008 at 12:08 am
Giving the government $700B to buyout mortgages that arent valued correctly is just plain dumb. And without regulation those same bankers are going to screw us over again as they sell the government $400,000 mortgages for houses worth $250,000.
9.
This&that
October 2nd, 2008 at 7:49 am
Democrats in congress pushed for 15 years to force banks to give loans to people who could not pay them back.
President Clinton, Bush (and even McCain in 2005) attempted to stop this madness and failed becuase of entrenched congress members pushing these bad loans (while getting sweet low interest loans and huge donatations from Fanny and Freddy).
Examples (from Wall st. Jn):
Sept 2003:
1) Rep. Barney Frank (D., Mass.): I worry, frankly, that there’s a tension here. The more people, in my judgment, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see. I think we see entities that are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disaster scenarios. . . .
or
2) Rep. Waters (D) : However, I have sat through nearly a dozen hearings where, frankly, we were trying to fix something that wasn’t broke. Housing is the economic engine of our economy, and in no community does this engine need to work more than in mine. With last week’s hurricane and the drain on the economy from the war in Iraq, we should do no harm to these GSEs. We should be enhancing regulation, not making fundamental change.
Mr. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and in particular at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Mr. Frank Raines. Everything in the 1992 act has worked just fine. In fact, the GSEs have exceeded their housing goals. . .
or on teh Senate side:
Senate Banking Committee, Feb. 24-25, 2004:
Sen. Thomas Carper (D., Del.): What is the wrong that we’re trying to right here? What is the potential harm that we’re trying to avert?
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan: Well, I think that that is a very good question, senator.
What we’re trying to avert is we have in our financial system right now two very large and growing financial institutions which are very effective and are essentially capable of gaining market shares in a very major market to a large extent as a consequence of what is perceived to be a subsidy that prevents the markets from adjusting appropriately, prevents competition and the normal adjustment processes that we see on a day-by-day basis from functioning in a way that creates stability. . . . And so what we have is a structure here in which a very rapidly growing organization, holding assets and financing them by subsidized debt, is growing in a manner which really does not in and of itself contribute to either home ownership or necessarily liquidity or other aspects of the financial markets. . . .
Sen. Richard Shelby (R., Ala.): [T]he federal government has [an] ambiguous relationship with the GSEs. And how do we actually get rid of that ambiguity is a complicated, tricky thing. I don’t know how we do it.
I mean, you’ve alluded to it a little bit, but how do we define the relationship? It’s important, is it not?
Mr. Greenspan: Yes. Of all the issues that have been discussed today, I think that is the most difficult one. Because you cannot have, in a rational government or a rational society, two fundamentally different views as to what will happen under a certain event. Because it invites crisis, and it invites instability. . .
Sen. Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.): I, just briefly will say, Mr. Chairman, obviously, like most of us here, this is one of the great success stories of all time. And we don’t want to lose sight of that and [what] has been pointed out by all of our witnesses here, obviously, the 70% of Americans who own their own homes today, in no small measure, due because of the work that’s been done here. And that shouldn’t be lost in this debate and discussion. . . .
Voting for complete Dem control of all three branches of gov’t will just deepend this mess since no one, not the in-the-tank media nor any member of gov’t, will be able to stop this madness.
10.
Kyle
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:14 am
Yeah, congress is full of douche bags But you forgot one group of people who would benefit from the bailout: everybody that owns financial stocks, which is practically everyone with a 401k these days.
11.
Wii Fit
October 3rd, 2008 at 6:21 am
Yes indeed you are writing a bit late on a whopping $700 billion bailout but you have written a fantastic article. Great enjoyed it a lot.
12.
Wii Fit
October 3rd, 2008 at 6:23 am
Yes indeed you are writing a bit late on a whopping $700 billion bailout but you have written a fantastic article. Great one.
13.
Lars
October 3rd, 2008 at 5:42 pm
hey the illustrations are a great addition to the post! adds a nice dimension to it… about that 700 billion bailout bit, it’s quite depressing at first but i basically stopped thinking about it because i have a lot on my plate that i need to focus more on…
14.
Private Investment Blog
October 5th, 2008 at 1:47 am
LOL that cartoon is teh pwnage - lol China lol
15.
elasticwaistbandlady
October 6th, 2008 at 7:10 am
I took it a step further and e-mailed both my Congressman and State Senator. Didn’t matter because the revised version still passed through the House. Frick.
There’s nothing I love more than bailing out Oregonian toy bow&arrow companies along with Puerto Rican rum runners with my hard earned tax dollars.
Thanks American government for screwing us over yet again!
16.
kim
October 6th, 2008 at 7:26 am
Hahaha.. Nice cartoon. i really enjoyed every part of this article. How about using such a big amount to make a good infrastructure like hospitals, schools, banks and so on.
17.
Rika Susan's Juicing For Health
October 6th, 2008 at 8:55 am
This is classic. I loved it. Here in South Africa, we have been keeping a close eye on the news feeds from the USA. Glad we are not in your shoes - yet…
18.
A1 Medical Supplies
October 8th, 2008 at 7:30 am
I agree with you that this really is a quick kick to the place where the sun don’t shine. I feel is a rushed and misguided plan, that does not address the real issues we are facing, but instead throws non-existant money at those that helped to lead us to where we are. It also is going to be a very important factor in my voting conscious…
19.
kurt
October 8th, 2008 at 9:33 pm
Hayden, yum…
Kick in the pants ain’t it, $700 billion bailout, paid by the tax-payers, and the US government becomes the biggest home owner organization in the world..
sigh..enough already please..
20.
Lina
October 10th, 2008 at 9:16 am
There is no sense to print out more money while people who operate with the money are still the same… it will solve nothing:(
21.
Obbop
October 13th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
No surprise as to actions at the federal govt. level.
The Founders created a fed. govt. of for and by an elite class.
Their mistake was believing that personal honor would compel future elites to consider the good of the commoners and the country as a whole along with the elite’s vested interests.
Greed and the creation of the modern corporate business model along with the diminishing of the old-fashioned concept of honor has led to what we see today.
Just obey your elite-class masters and you will likely fend off their jack-booted thug enforcement arms.
22.
Tracy
October 15th, 2008 at 3:05 am
Great writing indeed. We now see why you haven’t talked about bailout at all. You are pissed off like everyone else is. Who are they fooling ? They are just making bigger mistakes, and they are taking country more deeper and deeper in sh$ts.
The comic you made is really funny, but as much humorous it looks like, it is also very realistic. Lets pray you are wrong…
23.
Adult Friend
October 30th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Our economy is in the shitter…I think you made some good points…but I hope that we can rebound quicker…at least the FED cut the rate again…hopefully the banks will finally start lending again at lower rates as well.
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>Trackbacks & Pingbacks
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
Pingback by Okay, Fine, I’ll Write About the Damn Financial Bailout : $700 Billion Bailout Plan — October 1, 2008 @ 12:35 am