[lbo-talk] question for those opposed to the bailout

[Gar Lipow]

On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 1:59 PM, shag <shag at cleandraws.com> wrote:
> i was following the conversations, but i never got a good handle on why
> people were opposed to the bailout. i am trying to see if i can sum of the
> various classes of argument, and you can correct me:
>
> for some, it was obviously that the bailout was crap because it wasn't
> radical enough. we should have used this as an opportunity to force wall st
> types and their lackeys in congress to make important changes to the system
> that would redistribute wealth downward.
To expand my earlier answer:

I should add that for some it was obvious that the bailout was being
done in a way that would be costly to ordinary people (or if you want
the working and middle classes) without tackling the long term problem
and there were other solutions, some of them radical some of them
merely liberal that would have cause less working and middle class
pain, and also been a more effective solution to the problem.

It will really be interesting to note over the next few days whether
this bailout gives major institutions the confidence to start short
term lending again.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/business/economy/04plan.html


>Even after working feverishly over the last two weeks, the Treasury will not buy its first distressed asset from a bank for roughly six weeks, and almost certainly not until after the Nov. 4 elections.

Since this is in the pipeline rather than happening instantly, the
response will be a good measure of confidence, of "animal spirits" as
Keynes used to put it.