$5107.14

[bunnies]

$715,000,000,000 in "bailout money" / 140,000,000 taxpayers = $5107.14 per taxpayer

Thats $10,214.28 per 2-taxpayer household. $10,214.28 !!!

I'm guessing some people would have paid their mortgage...
I'm guessing some people would have purchased a car...
I'm guessing some people would have gone out and bought shit they really didn't need...
I'm guessing most Americans wouldn't be feeling to fucked over and pissed off right now...

And I'm guessing the economy would have been sufficiently "stimulated".

Oh well.

[HereSince1628]

1. You ain't seen the bottom line yet. There is another trillion of infrastructure

spending that is gonna be priority spending.

[bunnies]

7. I've no problem with that...

Its not just handing money to some giant company that fucked up. At least we'll get some jobs and better roads out of it...

[HereSince1628]

11. It still has to be paid for...either by taxes, by printing money or both

Interest on the debt is going to be huge and amount to many annual incomes by the time the debt is paid. Printing money is just simply going to kill us as purchasing power is cut.

There is no way to say it other than the bill for the US bank holiday from regulation and oversight is going to be very painful for a long time.

[PVnRT]

15. What's wrong with that?

It creates good-paying jobs that CAN'T be outsourced and improves a public good that everyone uses.

Explain to me how this is a bad thing?

[HereSince1628]

20. All I wrote is that the bill hasn't been added up yet.

And it hasn't. In the end, the bill for this recession is gonna be very large.

[Greyhound]

2. Bingo! K&R

Why have we not taken these parasites out of their offices and decorated the streets with their mangled corpses?

Let us not forget who are their enablers either.

[Idealism]

3. Can't argue the math of it but economic stimulation

doesn't occur by everyone going out and paying their mortgage, or buying a few shirts. It comes from investing in future developement and infrastructure projects, not short-term artificially inflated consumption

[bunnies]

5. except that NONE of the money in my figure comes from...

infrastructure projects. Bank $ and Car $. Thats it. If people could have paid their mortgages, the banks wouldnt have needed to be bailed out.

[Idealism]

8. Not quite

The financial crisis of liquidity resulted because of the tremendous amount of write-downs and losses banks had due to the collapse of housing prices, bad bets on mortgage backed securities, and bad bets on credit default swaps. It is a much bigger market for screw ups than the face value of every mortgage in the US

[bunnies]

9. Then let the banks eat the loss.

Like the rest of us are doing.

[Idealism]

14. That was the problem

If they ate the loss, they would owe way more than their assets were supposedly worth and be forced to liquidate. If the top banks in this country did that, the consensus among economists were that it would lead to chaos, an immediate great depression where people can't cash their paychecks because no one has money. Perhaps overblown, I don't think it would've been business as usual by any means if we didn't try to prop them up, but there was definately a better way that Paulson didn't want to try.

[bunnies]

17. Damn it.

I really wanted to be right. :spank: :hi:

[Idealism]

18. If you are interested

this lecture Paul Krugman gave about a month and a half ago was really good. It talks mostly about the financial crisis.

http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/archives.php?event_id=133

Have a good day

[bunnies]

19. Thanks. I'll check it out. nt

[sinkingfeeling]

4. But nobody's paid any 'real' money for the bailout. It's not like it was taken out of

your pocket. But people are still pissed.

[bunnies]

6. I'm not talking about what we paid...

I'm talking about what we could have received. Had the taxpayers gotten the money instead of Wall St... thats how much it would have been.

[Ganja Ninja]

10. $5107.14

That's a lot of booze and hookers.

[Horse with no Name]

12. and IPODS

Won't SOMEONE think of the children!!

[Shiver]

16. Pfft... I dunno where you live, but around here...

...$5107.14 isn't near enough to buy a quality child... :eyes:

[bunnies]

13. roflmao

Now THATS what I'm talkin' about! :rofl: :hi:

[hfojvt]

21. that's a lot of guessing though and your numbers are off

there were 134,372,678 tax filers in 2005. However that includes a fair number of "married filing jointly". It also includes 1,761,041 filers who reported income of zero or less. Somewhat puzzling to me is that group paid $133,370,000 in taxes.

Another 11,476,416 filers had income less than $5,000 and another 12,114,237 filers had income less than $10,000. Presumably many in that group are teen-agers. The under $5,000 group paid $72,794,000 in taxes which is counter-intuitive, since the standard deduction and personal exemption add up to more than $5,000.

So your plan would send some big checks to teenagers like my niece, who is already in a high income household. Then if it didn't stabilize the banking system - it would not, for example, stop AIG or Citi or Fannie or Freddie from collapsing and whatever else got knocked over when those giants fell, then it would mean very little. $15,000 to my brother-in-laws family is not gonna mean much if he loses his $50,000 job at Citi.