Bail out
Saja — Tue, 09/30/2008 - 23:44
Brought to you on behalf of Dave Ramsey, Financial Counselor
Years of bad decisions and stupid mistakes have created an economic nightmare in this country, but $700 billion
in new debt is not the answer. As a tax-paying American citizen, I will not support any congressperson who
votes to implement such a policy. Instead, I submit the following three steps:
Common Sense Plan.
I. INSURANCE
A. Insure the subprime bonds/mortgages with an underlying FHA-type insurance. Government-insured and
backed loans would have an instant market all over the world, creating immediate and needed liquidity.
B. In order for a company to accept the government-backed insurance, they must do two things:
1. Rewrite any mortgage that is more than three months delinquent to a 6% fixed-rate mortgage.
a. Roll all back payments with no late fees or legal costs into the balance. This brings homeowners current
and allows them a chance to keep their homes.
b. Cancel all prepayment penalties to encourage refinancing or the sale of the property to pay off the bad
loan. In the event of foreclosure or short sale, the borrower will not be held liable for any deficit balance. FHA
does this now, and that encourages mortgage companies to go the extra mile while
working with the borrower again limiting foreclosures and ruined lives.
2. Cancel ALL golden parachutes of EXISTING and FUTURE CEOs and executive team members as long as the
company holds these government-insured bonds/mortgages. This keeps underperforming executives from
being paid when they don't do their jobs.
C. This backstop will cost less than $50 billion a small fraction of the current proposal.
II. MARK TO MARKET
A. Remove mark to market accounting rules for two years on only subprime Tier III bonds/mortgages.
This keeps companies from being forced to artificially mark down bonds/mortgages below the value of the
underlying mortgages and real estate.
B. This move creates patience in the market and has an immediate stabilizing effect on failing and ailing
banks and it costs the taxpayer nothing.
III. CAPITAL GAINS TAX
A. Remove the capital gains tax completely. Investors will flood the real estate and stock market in search of
tax-free profits, creating tremendous and immediate liquidity in the markets. Again, this costs the taxpayer nothing.
B. This move will be seen as a lightning rod politically because many will say it is helping the rich. The truth is
the rich will benefit, but it will be their money that stimulates the economy. This will enable all Americans to
have more stable jobs and retirement investments that go up instead of down. This is not a time for envy, and
it's not a time for politics. It's time for all of us, as Americans, to
stand up, speak out, and fix this mess.
Send it to your Senators http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
and representatives https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtml
by copying and pasting the text in the web form you're
sent to.



Did anyone here what AIG
everstar — Wed, 10/08/2008 - 08:50Did anyone here what AIG executives and CEOs did with over 440K of that Money?? ..................
you can check for vids on yahoo.com or check out this link http://taxdollars.freedomblogging.com/2008/10/02/after-federal-bailout-aig-fetes-in-style-in-oc/ theres a lot of places to view this news.
----------------------------------------------------
"Now i want you to take a step back...and literally fuck your own face!"
There are a number of issues
Dufe — Wed, 10/01/2008 - 06:07There are a number of issues I would have with several of his claims, but I don't have the time to write them out. Maybe later this week if I still remember.
One of your final points, is
Derchlon — Wed, 10/01/2008 - 00:11One of your final points, is one of the reasons I'm not a fan of Obama's tax policy. If you tax the rich TOO much, it will trickle down and hurt those whom they employ. Businesses will start cutting back on and/or not hiring new employees, which would increase unemployment rates, and possibly lower wages all around. A sort of "invisible" tax on the working class/middle class. To be fair, McCain doesn't have anything substantially better anyway. Neither of them want to cut spending as much as it needs to be cut in comparison with their tax policies.
To get more on topic, I like this idea to a degree. It provides some nice areas of future prevention, but I'm not convinced that spending even $50 billion is the right thing to do at this point, unless we can balance the budget accordingly.