Quote:
Originally Posted by vermicious knid
You are confused about what his amendment calls for. You weren't criticizing any of his amendments. You were criticizing the very bill itself.
Classic. What do you think this "bailout" is that people are talking about if it isn't the government assuming bad loans? What you call "Dodd's idea" was proposed by George W. Bush's treasury secretary.
|
The article itself says that Dodd wanted the government to assume private loans such as credit cards and auto loans too. Paulson called for a bailout, but not for ALL loans in the US to be under congressional perview. Again, I highlighted it in every way imaginable so that you would know what I was criticising specifically as fascist. Both Paulsen and congress have both presented alternative plans and are negotiating. It's called the legislative process. Everyone else here gets it but you. I guess if it doesn't fit on a bumper sticker, you don't understand it.
I have a basic problem with the tax payers paying for the bailout itself, but I wouldn't call it fascist, since most of these are already overseen by Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae. I would call expanding governmental oversight over credit cards and auto loans without the consumer's consent fascist by any measure. Go reread the article and there is another one that was just posted on Yahoo's front page that also calls the provision "Dodd's addition", so take up your argument with the people that wrote the article if you don't believe them, but that is what they are reporting that Dodd wants to do that is different from Paulsen's proposal.