Marc Faber, who predicted the 1987 crash, says the rescue package may require as much as $5 trillion

[girl gone mad]

Asian markets are down, btw, on concern this bailout won't work.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&refer=home&sid=aU1z.mfnNaI4

[ColbertWatcher]

1. "Rescue" ? "Require" ?

Who the fuck is this guy?

Sorry, dude.

$5 trillion is too much.

The GOP need to work within their means.

[girl gone mad]

4. He is against the bailout, from what I can tell.

He believes they are lying about what it will end up costing if we go down this route.

"So now they try to solve the problem by having this credit bubble actually extended and I think the $700 billion will be like a drop in the bucket because the total credit market in the U.S. is something close to $60 trillion, then you have the CDS market – credit default swap – of around $62 trillion. Then you have the whole derivatives worldwide worth about a notional $1,300 trillion. So the $700 billion is really nothing and the Treasury is just giving out this figure when actually the end figure may be $5 trillion."

Also says that the government has been inconsistent in its handling of the crisis so far, which is making matters worse.

[ColbertWatcher]

8. It sounds about right, I just don't care for his language is all. n/t

[scarletwoman]

10. That's the thing -- extending the credit bubble solves NOTHING!

The problem is structural, and the bailout does NOTHING to address the underlying structural problems, it's just a bubble gum and baling wire to keep the con running a little longer.

sw

[scarletwoman]

2. Well, fuck THAT shit. Let's just raze Wall Street and start over, seems to me it would be a lot

less expensive.

[girl gone mad]

5. This is the danger in throwing good money after bad.

There is no practical limit to the insanity. No one knows precisely how large the derivatives market is, or what percentage of the market is at risk.

[AdHocSolver]

7. No money should be provided without a thorough AUDIT of these companies FIRST.

This is why I consider that this bailout demand is a swindle. Why aren't these banks opening up their books for an audit?

If a company went to a bank for a loan, but had no idea what their assets or debts amounted to, the bank would demand an audit of that company before parting with the money (or, at least, they should).

Yet these financial institutions come to the taxpayers and demand $700 billion without FIRST submitting to an audit. This is craziness.

Without an independent audit, the government is merely writing a blank check. We already wrote several "blank checks" for billions of dollars for previous bailouts. Enough!

[magellan]

11. I WISH we could rec replies -- This deserves its own thread

n/t

[DJ13]

3. That much $ will require an international effort

A large portion of these financial instruments are held by foreign firms and governments, its time they step up and shoulder some of the burden.

[Critters2]

6. Dow Jones pre-market futures are down -102. NASDAQ and S&P

look like they'll be opening down, too.

[ShortnFiery]

9. "Rescue Package" my ass! More like "raping the middle class tax payers." eom

[TexasObserver]

12. That's what I've been saying. It's a 5 foot sea wall for a 20 foot storm surge.

This bailout is aptly named, because bailing water in a boat taking water is exactly what they're doing. This effort may juice the economy for a few months, but come 2009, it's all going to shit again, and there won't be any more bailouts.

We have a multi trillion dollar credit bubble, and $250 billion or $700 billion won't fix it.

[girl gone mad]

13. But that money could be put to good use..

and we could use our current circumstances to pass legislation that might actually benefit the economy.