Oil Up, Stocks Down. Plus: The Root Of All Evil

The current solution is atrocious in its oversight and creates a financial dictator in Paulson. Note that $700 billion is not the upper limit of losses for the taxpayer, only an outstanding balance sheet number the treasury can work with. The potential losses to the taxpayer can be more.

The fear is Congress will still pass it albeit with more bailout provisions for other interested parties.

As an alternative, there is a very good solution proposed at FedUpUSA.org - a grass roots organization.

Be informed.. make your voice heard and call your senators.

Sent by G Makani | 7:59 PM | 9-22-2008

I'm loving Planet Money. But.. small point... the "$5,200" per household from "24/7WallStreet" strikes me as a meaningless number - it's based on the mean instead of the median, right? (Remember, if Bill Gates walks into the room, its mean income instantly zooms.) A slightly better question would be "what does a person who makes $50K/ year (median income) contribute in Federal income taxes to the bailout/buyout?" But I don't find even that a particularly helpful question by itself. Just more numbers, not giving a useful comparison.
Small slip: most of your interviewees are excellent choices, this was someone you just mentioned with a link.

Sent by BDS | 9:09 PM | 9-22-2008

So Bush's solution is to transfer even more power to the president -- sans any congressional or judicial oversight or check/balance -- and McCain sees himself riding in on the white horse? Give me a break! When your house is burning down, you don't call the arsonists.

Sent by Janell Carter | 7:22 AM | 9-23-2008

This is fraud - plain and simple - on a massive scale - and what needs to happen - is many many many people need to go to jail and give up the money they have stolen - let the institutions and companies involved fail - we will survive - I personally will not vote for anyone who supports this bailout - give (no) not give - we the tax payers - the real owners of this country - need to TAKE it back!!!!

Sent by jqpublic | 7:47 AM | 9-23-2008

just heard your report on morning edition, in which reporter a. davidson sought voices of moderation re the financial services crisis (that's what it is btw) and couldn't find any. I would like to point out that this is a catastrophe to those working in fs simply b/c it is the first set of regulations not formed by them in at least 15 years -- as long as nearly anybody needs to work in that industry before cashing out, after all. from the perspective of a consumer, on the other hand, the catastrophe began once greenspan took control of the economy (through hyperlending for that last liquid us investment, homes) while banks were free to drop lending criteria, hence creating a lending class out of people who are not qualified to borrow, the "subprimes."

2000-2006 -- that was the crisis!

the crisis that's taking place now -- it's a crisis for those who had for years been feeding from the carcass of capitalism. of course it's a crisis to a washington dc lobbyist! or an unqualified borrower, or mortgage broker!

but by rising several levels above today's headlines one realizes that the crisis taking place today is not the death of capitalism but the poisoning of the least nimble jackals who had grown fat feasting, mysteriously uninterrupted and unrecorded, upon its carcass.

Sent by superf88 | 9:10 AM | 9-23-2008

I'd like to hear an estimate of what it would cost to simply not pass this bailout, and let the chips fall where they may. Might that not be cheaper for taxpayers? Without that estimate from a credible (non Wall Street) source, how can the Congress make an intelligent decision about the bailout?

Sent by Joe McCarthy | 9:15 AM | 9-23-2008