Gentle Reader -- You are welcome to peruse my web-based journal. I assure you that my contributions to this medium will be both infrequent and inconsequential. Read on!

I HAVEN'T CHANGED MY MIND ABOUT THE BAILOUT

But this is annoying:

Paulson resisted suggestions being made by Democrats that the program be
changed to include further relief for homeowners facing mortgage foreclosures
and to include an additional $50 billion stimulus effort. Some Democrats have
also suggested capping compensation of executives at firms who get the bailout
help.

Paulson said he was concerned that debate over adding all of those
proposals would slow passage of the bill, delaying the rescue effort that is so
urgently needed to get financial markets moving again.

Also proposed, fixing some of the more horrible and taxpayer-unfriendly elements of the bankruptcy code. I think these include the sections making credit card debt impossible to discharge in bakruptcy -- giving a perverse incentive to debtors to pay the cards each month and stop paying the mortgage.

If it's that big of an emergency, shouldn't we take the kitchen sink approach? The numbers here are so large already that it boggles the imagination. If we're in this for $700,000,000,000, what's another $100,000,000,000? Especially if it might really do some good? posted by Carlton at 2:20 PM

SILENT RUNNING

Not a lot of posting here lately. Obviously there's lots of news. Maybe I'll have something to say about it in the days ahead -- or maybe not! posted by Carlton at 11:17 PM

THE BAILOUT

I don't claim to have any particular expertise on this, but I think that the poplist outrage towards the proposed plan is misplaced. There's a real emergency at hand right now, an imminent threat that if not properly handled could result in a truly miserable state of affairs, affecting all Americans. The proposed plan may not work, or be the best possible, but some of the rhetoric I've seen is wrongheaded.

My understanding is that the interbank lending which allows our financial system to function is simply not happening - because no one wants to lend to an insolvent bank, and it's impossible to tell who is and isn't insolvent because these huge assets (the mortgage-backed securities, primarily) held by the banks are impossible to value. Are they worth 50% of face value? 5%? This new agency sets a minimum price for the assets, and then we can sort out who is actually insolvent using that price.

Two responses to the objections: 1) The assets the government would buy aren't valueless, just difficult to value -- and some of them may end up being worth equal or more than the government pays for them. The government isn't throwing this $700 bn out the window (though it may net a loss). 2) If a man sets his own house on fire for the insurance money, we still call the fire department. Later, we put him in jail. We're calling the fire department right now. posted by Carlton at 11:16 PM

I CLEARLY MEANT "L"

When I said "W" before. posted by Carlton at 11:15 PM