Anyone here old enough to remember the S&L bailout from the 80's? It seemed absolutely enormous at the time. Well... I had pretty well forgotten the details of it but fortunately there are those with better memories (or searching skills) that do remember. And funny thing is, one of our presidential candidates was in the thick of it...

http://www.keatingeconomics.com/

Seems like he's learned nothing over the last 20 years about leaving financial institutions virtually unregulated.

Hah, I came here to post the same thing.

The McCain campaign is in big trouble. They trot out Ayers and get slammed with Keating. Talk about bringing a knife to a gunfight. Sheesh.

Of course, Phil Gramm ought to be a bad enough association to sink him right now... Gramm is/was McCain's financial go-to guy and he was also the guy that lobbied hard to get Glass/Steagall (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Act) act repealed which was the undoing of all these investment banks we're bailing out (or failed). He also co-sponsored another bill that created the big loophole that Enron used to defraud people. Then he called everyone "whiners" when they complained about the economy this past summer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NVjq2py7BA

Health care and Social Security are going to be big ones in another couple of years for the next economic crisis. Particularly, after the way alot of people's 401k and pension plans took dives.

Funny thing about all this is, 30 years ago, when I was born they were issues, unresolved and all eventually coming to a head. Honestly though, it would be better in the long run to let it all tank for the time being( they will survive believe it or not), repossess all that "bad money", pay off outstanding debts (deficit or at least on it etc), let the economy sort itself out, and the dollar will regain value. With that value, the consumers will then be able to drive the economy. But, instead we get to pay poor business practices marked up for inflation, example, decent houses in Cali for 400 k, where more affordable for the same houses, would be 200k in that area, so, they can continue overcharging consumers while continuing to set ourselves up for more economic failures.

I don't think this one would settle out without taking the economy down the tubes for 10 years or so. Japan had something similar happen and that's about how long it has taken them to come back.

What's happening is that no one can get loans now. So businesses who need short term loans, like to make their payroll, can't get them. Can't meet a payroll? Well.. you pretty much have to close up right then and there. Bam! Bankrupt businesses that have nothing to do with the housing debacle.

Auto dealers can't sell cars because banks aren't making loans. Bam! Out-of-business.

California hasn't collected enough revenue so far this year to pay for stuff, they can't borrow it short term because no one is lending. Bam! Bankrupt state.

It's a shame but our economy can't operate without short (or long) term credit. If we don't fix it then we can probably look forward to something that's at least as bad as the depression my parents lived through. 25% unemployment doesn't sound real appealing.

I'm just afraid that the goobers trying to fix it will not really fix it. I just heard that Paulson is putting a 35 year old guy, just out of school for 6 years, in charge of that $700 billion.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2008/10/09/700-billion-was-a-drop-in-the-bucket.aspx

Don't say I told you so, but really, it was better to let it all crash. All this basically does is devalue the dollar, by throwing money at the problem. We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. It does little in the way of anything remotely close to a fix.

General Motors with their issues is a joke at this point amongst the automotive industry. They continue upon the same problems they had 10 years ago. They have massive union issues, the United Auto Workers have repeatedly screwed them over, and consumers as well. How so you might ask? By forcing the workers with little to no actual job skills to be paid at huge wages, not comparable with many other jobs of similar skill levels. In other words it does not take alot of skill to torque a few bolts down every minute or so, I do the same thing, just on a smaller product for them, but, I actually have job skills involving welding and such. Their welders, mechanics, and so on are a different story on the other hand as they actually have some skill and deserve their pay. Now, as a former automotive supplier to these guys, I was able to sell products to General Motors, and make a tidy little profit. General Motors can not make a profit any way or form. They had about 3 years ago, the highest selling year in history of their industry, and they lost 3 billion dollars doing this.

How is this possible again, paying huge wages to mostly to unskilled workers. Also, massive pension plans to said unskilled workers, with huge health care costs on the side as well. To get on Ford for a minute. 50 thousand Ford workers were busted on health care, by providing health care to people not qualified for the health care program that Ford provides. This was not just ok my child hit 18 years old did not go to college, so, I have to wait for open enrollment to take the child off the policy, and open enrollment is 6 months later kind of stuff. This was full on my grandmother/ mother/whatever, paying for triple bypass surgeries crap, unqualified for said insurance. So, of course, the costs are shifted over to the consumers. Back to General Motors employees, they pulled the same crap. Most auto suppliers at this point, gave an amnesty period on insurance, to get that crap in order.

So, how does this effect me as an automotive supplier, by effecting me directly in my wallet. Everytime, we had to cut costs, by doing so, usually meant I had to take a paycut(I took many), reduction of benefits(there goes my pension, 401k and so on) and so on. On top of that, we still made profits. While of course General Motors could not, while providing of course more wages to their employees with a screwed up union that is basically killing them. All the while they are looking for handouts left and right from every autoparts suppliers, and eventually to the government, basically threatening to lay off 300 thousand workers and declaring bankruptcy, shifting pensions onto the government, and hence taxpayers and generally screwing over the local economies relying on the overpaid workers in the housing industry amongst many others.

So, as a taxpayer, I do not want to be responsible for this crap. But, they are doing this anyways. As an automotive supplier, again, I do not want to put up with this crap. They have been shafting consumers for years, with poorly built vehicles, fuel ineffienct vehicles(the napathene engine has been obsolete for 60 years, yet, they keep giving it to you with higher horsepower), overpriced and so on, and on top of that, now everyone gets a share in it as a taxpayer. So, I get hit 4 times at least on this crap. Not to mention the other crap that goes on in the local economies over these issues.

So, apply alot of the same logic to the other crisis. The only thing fundamentally the United States is producing at the moment is bad debt in a clever little package, and we have been doing that for years. I want that to change, and in order to do that, that very economy needs to collapse and rebuild. On top of that, we need to pay off our deficits around 70 trillion dollars. Gee thanks, crappy politicians over the last 40 years and more. Oh, social security and health care the way it is now. That as well. It sure gives me a warm feeling in my heart to know that I when I was born, and my unborn children, besides, not even born yet, but, also in debt. So, if I seem allittle overly dramatic, I assure you I am not, so continuing to fund these bastards is not in my or the American people, or the world for that matters, best interests.

producing at the moment is bad debt in a clever little package, and we have been doing that for years. I want that to change, and in order to do that, that very economy needs to collapse and rebuild. On top of that, we need to pay off our deficits around 70 trillion dollars.
Ummm, when the economy is collapsing debts don't get paid.

Lets see we had a surplus 8 years ago right?

You Republicans need to figure this out. You. elected Reagan, he gave us an enormous debt from the cold war. We get out of it, then you gave us Bush 2 and he repeated it, plus as an extra bonus surprise, a nice economic melt-down do to deregulating everything they possibly can to allow corruption and greed to flourish unchecked.

If you want to be all hawkish and have an enormous military, kick ass all over the globe, you'd better resolve yourselves to having an enormous debt to go along with it.

That is the part I aggree with you Pan, I just disaggree about the way to go about it. I feel the only thing they are really doing is just making more debt, even with this plan. They are in spend, spend, spend mode, with no actual intake of income through taxes to pay off outstanding debts, in this plan of theirs, while they say we can make some money back on it, the key word is some money. Honestly, Bush got to run unchecked even with a democratic congress, he still did.

Everytime I turned around he was getting 500 billion for Iraq, A war I have pretty much maintained was bull all across the duration including the start of it, and all it was going to do was cause alot of financial hardships. He took a softening economy, with some room to right itself and grow, and start making more of a surplus to pay more on the deficits, which was around 30 trillion or so at the time, into a landslide, and not just a reccession, a potential depression is still looming.