USA: The Mother Of All Bank Runs?

added slash so I can watch:

Ooops... sorry! And thanks for that! :)

I disagree. The Democrats were in a terrible situation and I think they handled it well.

Their options were:
A) Tell Paulson to get lost and do nothing. That´s what Kucinich suggested - it is remarkable that he agreed with Ron Paul there. Those two guys don´t usually agree on anything. Problem: they would own the problem then. Not good just a few weeks before election.
B) Caugh up a better plan and use their majority in both houses to pass it. Problem: Bush would have vetoed it, calling their plan "socialist" and the Dems would own the problem.
C) Amend the Paulson plan like they did. Make it more flexible so Treasury can take over banks instead of just buying junk. That´s exactly what it is planning to do now. The plan is still bad, but maybe good enough to buy some time until there is a new administration.

What the naysayers ignore that in this situation, the ownership of the problem is just as important as the solution. Dems MUST win this election, otherwise there will be no solution at all.

Why I also disagree:
Quote Krugmann, the new economics guru according to Sweden´s central bank:

Never mind stocks, although a 500-point decline in the Dow (as of right now) is hard to ignore. Even aside from that, things are not looking good. Signs of an unfreezing in the credit markets are hard to find — maybe we shouldn’t have expected a quick result, but you do have to say that even the reformed Paulson plan has yet to produce any visible improvement in confidence. I’m most struck by the .04% yield on one-month T-bills — that’s depression-level flight to safety.

The bad news is of course that credit markets still don´t unfreeze. That was the whole point of the plan - NOT pushing up the Dow. The Dow is in free fall because everyone expects a severe recession, which seems to be inevitable now.
The good news is that Treasury Bills are still considered "safe". As long as they are, the next administrations has the financial means to solve the problem. If, on the other hand, that bubble bursts as well, we all can go plant potatoes.

Hudson suggests a "Jubilee Year to rescue society" - write off bad mortgages.

Excuse me! I may be a commie by American standards, but even I think that would be unfair. Nobody was forced at gunpoint into these mortgages. Of course it is wrong to throw these people out of their homes and end up having millions of empty homes and millions of people sleeping under bridges. These loans must be nationalized and renegotiated - not written off.

I think the Obama administration will do exactly that - if the rest of the world will still willing to buy treasury bills. I wouldn´t - just have a look at America´s government sector debt:

Federal Government Sector debt: $9.2 trillion
State & Local Government Sector debt: $2.2 Trillion
Un-funded Social Security contingent liabilities estimated looking forward: $7 Trillion
Un-funded Medicare/Medicaid contingent liabilities: $50 Trillion
Un-funded federal employee pension contingent liabilities (incl. Postal service): $4 Trillion (?)
Un-funded federal employee medical contingent liabilities: ?
Un-funded state & local government employee pension & medical contingent liabilities: $2.7 Trillion (?)
Other off-budget Federal Govt. borrowings: ?

SUM above Government Debt: $75.1 Trillion + ?

Well, basically this article wanted to make the point about this bailout will not help at all. However, we can see that all on the stock market as well.

Regardless how much money they will dump into the market, it won't make any difference to the investors. The boat will be leaking anyway as long as they don't make a new system which actually works. It won't happen until next January until the new president's initiation ceremony. It will damage a lot until then.

Well, in 1929 nothing was done and that certainly didn´t help.

Also Angela's point was a bit unclear for me... Not helping the US would definitely harm the global market as it does right now. Although it was their own fire, they couldn't put it out... and now it burns everywhere. Would have needed global help immediately with a slight of a foresight about what can it does with the global economy. I mean it's gonna be bigger stuff than the Black Thursday of '29.

Don´t ask me what this woman thinks. During the East German revolution in 1989/90, she first leaned to the Green Party - she went to a couple of local meetings. She then ended up somehow in the conservative party - apparently only because she knew someone there. All of a sudden, she was in Kohl´s government, as minister for the environment. She got elected on a very neo-liberal platform (flat tax, tax breaks for corporations, less spending on social security, etc) but when she was Chancellor she made a complete u-turn. She has moved the conservatives to the left a lot.

I guess, all she really cares for is power. Keep what she has and get more. So - my theory is she thought the crash would hurt Germany a little and America a lot. In the end, both will be weaker but Germany (and Europe) relatively stronger. In Germany, everybody is pretty pissed of by Bush´s unilateralism. No miracle 200.000 came to see Obama´s speech in Berlin. I can speak for 100% (if we round up) of my German countrymen: we want to see the mutherf*ckers burn.

Those who dare to invest nowadays will make a fortune for sure, if they know how to.

So those guys who caused this trouble, will actually make more money on it! Nice, eh?

That´s exactly why I want to see the governments investing in banks now (= take them over instead of buying their junk papers). I am convinced there is money to be made. If it helps the economy as well - all the better. :)