Bailouts - Dr. D speaks

Here is a response from Dr.D. to one of my posts. He has great points that need to be in any "plan" that is enacted:

"You say that we should lend the money to these "failing companies." But the truth is, they are not credit worthy, so you are asking us, the American people, to do exactly what the banks have been doing for the last 20 years, namely making bad loans. How does this solve anything at all? If we are to make the loans you describe, I think that there need to be criminal penalties for the executive officers of those companies receiving the loans if they fail to pay them back on schedule. There needs to be strict control of the company's ability to pay high salaries to executives until such time as the loans are repaid. Too many big shots will see this as just another opportunity to rip the American people off. You asked if this was Constitutional. Surely you were joking! Of course, it is not. We have not had Constitutional government in ages. Our federal government abandoned the Constitution many years ago when it became just too inconvenient and restrictive for their taste. What we have is nothing at all like what the Founding Fathers had in mind!"

Couldn't have said it better myself. Of course I was joking! But not about this: How about "jail with no bail" to the executive officers... But one more thing, Letter to Sen. Mitch McConnell I have been calling and e-mailing my Congressman and Senators. I'm sick of "throwing" money at failing enterprises such as our government educational system without strict penalties for "failure". If anything proves we need less Socialism and more "free market" Capitalism, this bank/lending debacle proves it in Aces. How does loaning the money make it better? Loaning it with strict penalties, jail-time, and NO golden parachutes to the execs is better than "giving" the money to them. I don't trust the Treasury Secretary, the Federal Reserve, or any one in the Democrat Leadership on this issue. So "strict control" over any money loaned is essential. That and ending "affirmative action" lending, period. As far as I am personally concerned, I'd never run my household finances like the "loons" have set up and established the monopolies and the combinations of tasks - banking, home mortgages, brokerage houses - within institutions. The "bundling" that has led to this mess is the cross-inbreeding of tasks under several financial institutions. Down the road, we should dissolve the "monopolies" we have established under legislation/deregulation legislation passed by Congress and signed into law or continued by several respective presidents. Nobody is squeaky "clean" on this one up until now but some folks better start washing their hands with anti-monopoly soap PDQ. One more quotation from Rich: "Beach Girl: Catching up on all of your recent posts; right on! This entire fiasco is a distraction to what is so obvious to me, government precedent to run our economy. We have heard Senator Boxer say she would take over the oil companies when they were making too much money. Now they want to take over Wall Street when they are losing money. These politicians want the keys to the "capitalist treasury". Imagine if they could get their hands on a vehicle to make money instead of graveling to the taxpayers all the time. Nirvana! Not one democratic leader beleives in our system. They want to over throw it any way they can. They are all corrupt and need to be changed; now! Term limits by force of the vote on November 4th. I am sick of these idiots. Frank and Dodd should be investigated at a minimum. The entire congress most likely will be tied to the dirty political money of Wall Street. It is time for a real change. If not now, when?" I concur - Barney Frank and Chris Dodd need to investigated at the least however, with Czarina Pelosi in control of the government - no chance of that.