and perhaps end capital-gains taxes in order to encourage investors into kick-starting the economy

Lowering the capital-gains taxes encourages the rapid buying an selling of stock, which, in some sense, is what got us into this mess.
Now, if you were to lower the total tax on dividends (corporate tax + dividend tax) in one way or another, that would encourage real, long term investment (and probably better corporate management as well).
Think about it: stocks are really only supposed to have value because of the dividends they are supposed to provide.

Worst idea ever. Sign the bailout bill, end your career in politics.

That way if things aren’t improving by Nov. then the politicians can point to the Democrats as blocking needed reform.

PS: I’m not very thrilled with the structure of this bail-out bill anyway. So having it go down to defeat at the hands of the Democrats would be a win/win.

richard_223 on September 22, 2008

It looks like the way Congress appoints commissions to determine their pay raises. That way they have political cover and avoid accountability. Question: Do they come to Congress as miserable, gutless, soulless cowards or does Washington make them that way?

The question Ed asked earlier today, do we really want to put so much power in one man as Financial Czar, is not even being discussed in the MSM or Congress.

It would allow Republicans in congress to follow McCain’s lead and abandon George W. Bush’s sad & ineffective leadership.

I’ve also read that it was an effort to win votes for the Dems in 2000 from the sub prime electorate.

It all makes sense to me. The “hot market” was a result of the banks being forced into the subprime market. Greed may have been the after affect but not the cause. Am I daft?

Mr_Magoo on September 22, 2008 at 8:20 PM

If you really want to know…

Mark Levin has been educating people on this subject for weeks. His show yesterday was exceptionally thorough.

I’ve also read that it was an effort to win votes for the Dems in 2000 from the sub prime electorate.

It all makes sense to me. The “hot market” was a result of the banks being forced into the subprime market. Greed may have been the after affect but not the cause. Am I daft?

Mr_Magoo on September 22, 2008 at 8:20 PM

According to excellent reporting by Ed last week, this was caused in part by the Community Reinvestment Act which was signed into law under that Master of Unintended Consequences, Jimmy Carter. It wasn’t enforced largely until Clinton, I believe, from the info. Ed gave in his analysis. I’m too lazy to look it up. Look back thru last week and you will find it.

http://bellalu0.wordpress.com/2008/09/22/palin-power-under-hot-florida-sun/

This is only the begining of what this is going to cost in the long run. Are all those houses coming up for sale? Good bye equity. It’s more of a hit than we know right now. I bet homeowners are the same people who pay taxes.

Keep your stinking blood money Obama! Give back all that money Fannie gave your Senate campaign. It’s payoff money for letting these guys off without trial.

If we encourage our reps to stand up they will! No more stimulus money the bail out is ENOUGH!

If there was enough of a fuss we might could turn leadership back to Rs at least THIS didn’t happen when they were in control.

Congress and the Bush administration handed everyone back $600 of their own money and treated it as some sort of gift

What is a stimulus check? I’ve never seen one. Not everyone got some of their money back. For most people. they got a pittance of their money. A teaser. Enough to buy groceries and gas for a month. What a crock. And congress want to do it again.

Can anyone say “Buy the Votes?”

Well, this looks like fun. Let’s do it again! Before my wife and I purchased our home, we visited a mortgage company and examined our options. We were asked to provide quite a bit of information about our debts,……

Bush has to do three things:

Restore normal trading activities on Wall Street by buying up toxic derivatives no one else wants to own…..

rockhauler on September 22, 2008 at 7:16 PM

This is the worst possible way to start “fixing” the problem!!! If the goal is liquidity, you can achieve liquidity by buying only good investments!!!

Let those who caused the problem by their own irresponsibility eat the bad investments.

Can I stop now?

Steve_Roberts on September 22, 2008 at 6:48 PM

The boat to Cuba is leaving, and you’ll have to stop yammering and run to catch it!

How to make a bad situation worse
…

So true. The worse thing for socialists/communists is to have a global business model. It is one of the problems that the ChiComs are dealing with now as they allow more foreigners in to conduct business. Not only do they lose their stranglehold on the minds of their countrymen, but, they are also losing their culture. I think they are becoming perplexed.

It seems that Obama is trying to raise the flag of isolationism again here as well.

We have been falling into socialism since the New Deal. That is why this election is so important. We can’t let the Dems control the WH and Congress.

genso on September 22, 2008 at 8:19 PM

IMO, we have also been fighting against isolationism for the past decades, which was also prevalent before the attack on Pearl Harbor. I was stunned to see news reels this weekend in an FDR documentary showing people picketing in front of the White House saying “We don’t want Europe’s sticking war!” (paraphrased) I thought Vietnam was the first war where Americans picketed against the war.

mike volpe on September 22, 2008 at 6:45 PM
You say you’re “in the business”? What business would that be?

Why would a bank lend money to someone who can’t pay it back? Unless they were forced to, that is?

Squiggy on September 22, 2008 at 7:42 PM

I thought that this all started in the Clinton administration and the banks were being threatened by Janet Reno that they would be prosecuted for redlining if they didn’t approve subprime loans. That’s what Rush said today on his show and I’d have to believe Rush Limbaugh before someone named mike volpe.

I’ve also read that it was an effort to win votes for the Dems in 2000 from the sub prime electorate.

It all makes sense to me. The “hot market” was a result of the banks being forced into the subprime market. Greed may have been the after affect but not the cause. Am I daft?