Comments on: I Often Have Opinions http://blogs.philadelphiaweekly.com/trouble/2008/09/30/i-often-have-opinions/ A blog about mental health Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:55:48 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Jake http://blogs.philadelphiaweekly.com/trouble/2008/09/30/i-often-have-opinions/comment-page-1/#comment-3792 Jake Sat, 11 Oct 2008 06:27:45 +0000 http://trouble.pwblogs.com/2008/09/30/i-often-have-opinions/#comment-3792 Yeah, it was my fault. But I took my eye off the ball & it later passed. Yeah, it was my fault. But I took my eye off the ball & it later passed.

]]> By: scott http://blogs.philadelphiaweekly.com/trouble/2008/09/30/i-often-have-opinions/comment-page-1/#comment-3791 scott Thu, 02 Oct 2008 17:44:23 +0000 http://trouble.pwblogs.com/2008/09/30/i-often-have-opinions/#comment-3791 Good commentary on this issue can be found in Paul Krugman's blog (via the NYT). He does a good job explaining the crisis, the bailout, and alternative forms of bailout (eg, rather than a sweeping Paulsen type plan, simply nationalize failing institutions--a la Fanny and Freddie--and sell them back to the public once profitable). Another idea would be to take the troubled mortgages and convert them to government paper at a fixed rate for 30 yrs. This was done in the Depression. Good news for us though...mental health parity was tacked on to the Senate bill last night. Good commentary on this issue can be found in Paul Krugman’s blog (via the NYT). He does a good job explaining the crisis, the bailout, and alternative forms of bailout (eg, rather than a sweeping Paulsen type plan, simply nationalize failing institutions–a la Fanny and Freddie–and sell them back to the public once profitable).

Another idea would be to take the troubled mortgages and convert them to government paper at a fixed rate for 30 yrs. This was done in the Depression.

Good news for us though…mental health parity was tacked on to the Senate bill last night.

]]> By: Kent http://blogs.philadelphiaweekly.com/trouble/2008/09/30/i-often-have-opinions/comment-page-1/#comment-3790 Kent Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:13:56 +0000 http://trouble.pwblogs.com/2008/09/30/i-often-have-opinions/#comment-3790 I'm not sure if it's bad that the bailout didn't pass, either. I think it depends partly on what, if anything, is done in its place. From what I know of it, if things continue on their current course it is likely that most kinds of credit will dry up, and therefore businesses and other kinds of economic activity that depend on credit will not be able to continue. That would probably cause a lot of jobs to be lost, making the recession even more severe and causing even more widespread poverty. But I think there may be better and fairer ways of preserving most kinds of lending than what was in the proposal that was rejected on Monday. Bill Clinton recently suggested putting a moratorium on all home foreclosures. I suppose that would mean somehow renegotiating the terms of the loans of everyone who can't make their payments, and maybe accepting payments based on a percentage of income, or something like that. I think that would cause many lenders to at least get a little bit back in many cases where they might otherwise get nothing at all. It would also help a lot of people to be able to keep on living in their homes. Another thing that could be done would be to enact some kind of little tax on transactions of stocks or currencies - something like a Tobin Tax*. It would be a small percentage of the amount being transacted, something like 1/4 of one percent, which could be used to help reimburse the government for the cost of the bailout. It would have the added advantage of discouraging reckless financial speculation, which was one of the main causes of the current situation. There are many other such things which could be done to help rebuild the economy from the bottom up, rather than having more top-down types of stuff. Doing those kinds of things would probably make a bailout of the big financial institutions more fair, I think, by reducing the burden that it imposes on people who are struggling to just get by. But if there's no chance of things like that being enacted, then maybe it would be better if they just passed something like the thing that they rejected on Monday. That's probably better than doing nothing at all, and I think it's definitely better than the original bailout plan that was first offered by Bush and Treasury Secretary Paulson. It all kind of reminds me of something a desk clerk at an old residential hotel where I used to live always said - "Someone once told me 'cheer up, things could be worse'. So I cheered up and, sure enough, things got worse." (But I think occasionally things can get better, also.) *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobin_tax I’m not sure if it’s bad that the bailout didn’t pass, either. I think it depends partly on what, if anything, is done in its place. From what I know of it, if things continue on their current course it is likely that most kinds of credit will dry up, and therefore businesses and other kinds of economic activity that depend on credit will not be able to continue. That would probably cause a lot of jobs to be lost, making the recession even more severe and causing even more widespread poverty. But I think there may be better and fairer ways of preserving most kinds of lending than what was in the proposal that was rejected on Monday.

Bill Clinton recently suggested putting a moratorium on all home foreclosures. I suppose that would mean somehow renegotiating the terms of the loans of everyone who can’t make their payments, and maybe accepting payments based on a percentage of income, or something like that. I think that would cause many lenders to at least get a little bit back in many cases where they might otherwise get nothing at all. It would also help a lot of people to be able to keep on living in their homes.

Another thing that could be done would be to enact some kind of little tax on transactions of stocks or currencies – something like a Tobin Tax*. It would be a small percentage of the amount being transacted, something like 1/4 of one percent, which could be used to help reimburse the government for the cost of the bailout. It would have the added advantage of discouraging reckless financial speculation, which was one of the main causes of the current situation. There are many other such things which could be done to help rebuild the economy from the bottom up, rather than having more top-down types of stuff.

Doing those kinds of things would probably make a bailout of the big financial institutions more fair, I think, by reducing the burden that it imposes on people who are struggling to just get by. But if there’s no chance of things like that being enacted, then maybe it would be better if they just passed something like the thing that they rejected on Monday. That’s probably better than doing nothing at all, and I think it’s definitely better than the original bailout plan that was first offered by Bush and Treasury Secretary Paulson. It all kind of reminds me of something a desk clerk at an old residential hotel where I used to live always said – “Someone once told me ‘cheer up, things could be worse’. So I cheered up and, sure enough, things got worse.” (But I think occasionally things can get better, also.)

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobin_tax

]]> By: erin http://blogs.philadelphiaweekly.com/trouble/2008/09/30/i-often-have-opinions/comment-page-1/#comment-3789 erin Wed, 01 Oct 2008 15:11:51 +0000 http://trouble.pwblogs.com/2008/09/30/i-often-have-opinions/#comment-3789 i believe they were 12 republican votes short of passing it. figures. i believe they were 12 republican votes short of passing it.

figures.

]]> By: scott http://blogs.philadelphiaweekly.com/trouble/2008/09/30/i-often-have-opinions/comment-page-1/#comment-3788 scott Tue, 30 Sep 2008 21:59:12 +0000 http://trouble.pwblogs.com/2008/09/30/i-often-have-opinions/#comment-3788 Twas not a great plan, but it was a mistake not to pass it. In the end, the price of inaction will be borne by the public. Hopefully they wake up and do something better than the Paulsen plan next week. Twas not a great plan, but it was a mistake not to pass it. In the end, the price of inaction will be borne by the public. Hopefully they wake up and do something better than the Paulsen plan next week.

]]>