Dow futures: -236.00 (10128)

[pokerfan]

But it would have been -336.00 without the bailout. :sarcasm:

[radfringe]

1. whatsamadderwitdem?

don't they know mccain wants to turn the page? don't talk about the economy - invest in mud throwing.

McCain - the Erratic Maverick (Mavratic?)

[jpgray]

2. Would it? Was the bailout supposed to "take effect" by now?

The problem with making assumptions about this bill is that no one really knows what -exactly- it was supposed to do to the markets and in what time frame it was supposed to do it. "Free up credit markets" possibly, but when? "Buy bad debt" sure, but at what price and how quickly? "Fix the economy?" I don't know if anyone claimed that one. "Stop a crisis" yes, but given that we'll undoubtedly see more turmoil in the coming weeks, is there any way to prove it's more or less turmoil than we'd have seen absent the bailout? If we have a major crisis anyway, how will anyone prove that it was a better or worse crisis due solely to the bailout passage?

:crazy:

People will likely argue the side they wish to argue, and the actual data will follow some time from now. (Prediction: the bailout won't be greeted as a liberator)

[Hugin]

3. Terminology change alert...

The bailout is now to be called the 'splurge'.

It's more confidence inducing.

[radfringe]

4. looks more like a SPLUNGE to me... n/t

[Hugin]

5. I don't make the doublespeak...

I only pass it along.


Ha! Splunge... Take the Splunge! :) :/

[depakid]

6. With the problems in Euope over the weekend, that shouldn't surprise anyone

though in fact we don't know that the situation wouldn't be worse.

Not everything in the stock markets is tied to this bill (to say the least) which something that even the bailout obsessed should be able to understand.