Personal tools
 
Views

Argument: $700b plan saves economy and taxpayers, not just Wallstreet

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 21:54, 30 September 2008 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
(Supporting quotations)
← Previous diff
Current revision (16:18, 16 June 2010) (edit)
Lenkahabetinova (Talk | contribs)
(Parent debate)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
==Parent debate== ==Parent debate==
-*[[Debate:$700 billion US economic bailout| $700 billion US economic bailout]]+*[[Debate: $700 billion US economic bailout]]
- +
==Supporting quotations== ==Supporting quotations==

Current revision

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

John Mauldin. "Who's Afraid of a Big, Bad Bailout?". Thoughts from the Frontline. 26 Sept. 2008 - let's stop calling this a bailout plan. It is not. It is an economic stabilization plan. Run properly, it might even make the taxpayers some money. If it is not enacted very soon (Monday would be fine), the losses to businesses and investors and homeowners all over the US (and the world) will be enormous. Unemployment will jump to rates approaching 10%, at a minimum. How did all this come to pass? Why is it so dire? Let's rewind the tape a bit.


US Secretary of the Treasury Hank Paulson - "This is all about the taxpayers. That is all we are about...this troubled asset purchase program is the single most effective thing we can do to help homeowners, the American people, and stimulate our economy.” [1]

"I understand the view that I have heard from many of you on both sides of the aisle, urging that the taxpayer should share in the benefits of this plan to our financial system.
Let me make clear - this entire proposal is about benefiting the American people, because today's fragile financial system puts their economic well-being at risk.
The American people are angry about executive compensation and rightfully so. Many of you cite this as a serious problem and I agree. We must find a way to address this in the legislation, but without undermining the effectiveness of this programme."[2]


Maxine Waters (D-CA) - Bailout for Wall Street? I don't think so. I could care less about Wall Street and the high-priced schemers, their tricky products, hedge funds, short selling and insider trading. I care about Main Street. And Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive. I'm voting yes on this bill.[3]

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.