so the repub's plan sounds better to me; making wall street pay for their own bail out. what do you all think?

I can't really find good descriptions of any plans except the one that was originally proposed by the Fed/White House. Where'd you find the Republican one you're talking about, so I can look at it?

I think a key component of any successful plan will have to be increased regulation on big financial institutions, though.

i think you'd like it A LOT better. basically it starts with only $250B with an additional $100B if they can prove it's needed. the other $350B would have to be passed by congress at a later date if necessary. the responsibility of paying back the money wouldn't fall on the public, but rather on the companies being bailed out. imagine that?!?!?!

check the link below. towards the end of page 1 and on page 2 is where they start describing the alt. plan.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26884523/?GT1=43001

***I split this from the previous thread***

I definitely agree that dividing the 700b is a good step; that's way too much taxpayer money for one person (treasury secretary) to have control over.

I'm still kind of skeptical of any plan that lets the treasury secretary dole out the money however he sees fit, but I don't think any of the alternative plans (rep or dem) have addressed that much.

Here's an article I found describing Obama's plan (obviously biased, just citing for informative purposes): http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blog ... irest.aspx

The quote which describes it best is:
"1. Taxpayers should have equity, not just debt. This means they will have an upside as well as a downside.
2. Oversight will be bipartisan and without conflicts of interest.
3. Homeowners must be helped as well as their lenders in this mess. This means a moratorium on foreclosures involving principal residences. This could be done without infusion, but with non-cash backstopping and would help stop the property price crash.
4. Caps on salaries and other compensation will be strictly imposed on any institution that receives tax dollars."

I wonder if anyone will agree to a bipartisan compromise of using some of those guidelines in conjunction with the price cut Republican's are suggesting?

i'm hoping they'll agree on a plan that is a hybrid of the different alternative plans. i liked how that plan divided up the money, and had more governance of that money before it's given away. i also liked how you and i won't have to pay $5000 each in taxes to fix the problems these stupid bankers have gotten themselves into.

i believe there will be bipartisan comprimise, because it's going to be very difficult to approve a plan without it.

i just hope they won't rush this effort so much that important details are overlooked just to reach an agreement for the sake of agreeing.

I actually agree with a Republican plan for once, and I'm not liberal either.

OMG EXCLUSIVE : agreement?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... id=topnews

can't wait to read the final draft when they release it to the public. good thing we'll have like 5 minutes to read it before they approve it. good old democracy...

I'll be looking to see if they removed the $100 million for Acorn... Yellow_Flash_Colorz_PDT_21

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 2583451279

Warning: 47 minute video. Not recommending for Dirtymitch or other chronic dial-up abusers.