I did not attempt to construct an argument for the bailout but merely refuted your 10 "good arguments" against the bailout. The difference between what I did and what you claim I tried to do is quite large. You're apparently not much better at comprehending what people post than Dymtri. Perhaps the fact that you believe elves can construct a compelling case for anything is where you're first tripping up?
Why not define what you mean by "It won't work.", a meaningless statement. Do you believe that given two more weeks a better bailout would have been offered? If so what that has ever transpired under this administration gives you reason to believe this? Do you believe that time was not of the essence and that three months or more was available to craft a better bailout? If so, based on what? What damage is done to the US Govt. and financial sectors credibility by this bailout?
Since some of your problems with the bailout are that it "avoids addressing the underlying problem" and "puts off the problem to tomorrow" yet addressing these are not goals of the bailout package suggests you don't really know enough to form an argument one way or the other.
John Thornton