President Bush and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson today outlined a plan likely to cost hundreds of billions of dollars to contain the nation's widening financial crisis. "We must act now to protect our nation's economic health from serious risk," Bush said at a White House press conference.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/19/news/economy/paulson/index.htm?postversion=2008091910

Downside to the plan is its enormous cost, said Baumohl, estimating that the federal bail-out of the financial markets could swell the national deficit to $1 trillion annually.

 

 

 

This is scary, anyone want to take a guess who we would be paying that to?:scared::scared::scared::confused::eek:

Edited September 19, 200818 yr by bugatti

I wonder what percentage of our current national debt was piled up in the four terms of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

I wonder what percentage of our current national debt was piled up in the four terms of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

 

...

I wonder what percentage of our current national debt was piled up in the four terms of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

I know what you are getting at, but a lot of us believe the solution is controlled spending, not higher taxes.

...

The chart doesn't answer my question, although it's enlightening in its own right.

I know what you are getting at, but a lot of us believe the solution is controlled spending, not higher taxes.

I didn't prescribe higher taxes as a solution.

 

For the so-called party of small government, the Republicans sure have escalated the national debt in their last several terms in office.

I didn't prescribe higher taxes as a solution.

 

For the so-called party of small government, the Republicans sure have escalated the national debt in their last several terms in office.

:thumb::thumb:

:thumb::thumb:

I think Bush should have said "We should have acted yesterday..."

I think Bush should have said "We should have acted yesterday..."

 

He should have said, "It's not the government's place to intervene."

He should have said, "It's not the government's place to intervene."

 

We could all see this coming from a mile away. No one did anything until the excrement hit the rotary oscillator.

We could all see this coming from a mile away. No one did anything until the excrement hit the rotary oscillator.

 

No way you saw it coming. Sorry but that's just hyperbole. There were a few people who saw it coming but they were ignored.

We could all see this coming from a mile away. No one did anything until the excrement hit the rotary oscillator.

 

:laugh: FWIW, I am laughing at both the idea that you saw this from a mile away, and your hilarious metaphor.

 

If everyone could see this from a mile away, then what's the next move? Or are we doomed for not acting before hand? Also, what was the correct move?

:laugh: FWIW, I am laughing at both the idea that you saw this from a mile away, and your hilarious metaphor.

 

If everyone could see this from a mile away, then what's the next move? Or are we doomed for not acting before hand? Also, what was the correct move?

 

Actually, I don't know that I actually believe what I said, I was more just looking for a place to use my metaphor.

The chart doesn't answer my question, although it's enlightening in its own right.

I agree that the chart is eye opening. However I would like to see a chart that explained more why the debit went up or down. I know spending and all that but what spent exactly went up to cause the debit to increase and what went down when it decreased. To just put a line to it doesn't tell the story IMO.